How badly were Paul's hands tied? (re spectorized LAWR)
-
Everyone I'm sure knows the story...Paul wasn't a fan of Phil Spector's treatment of the version of the Long and Winding Road that made it to the final line up on the Let it Be album...I believe he had commented on this at the time and maybe a few times there after... But what kind of effort, aside from voicing his displeasure, did Paul put forth in trying to right what he considered a wrong (which I agree that it's the weakest version of the song recorded by Paul w/ the Beatles or at any time in his post Beatle period, including live recordings)? Was his hands legally tied or was it merely a situation where he didn't want to push it too hard and risk coming off as a bully and/or upsetting his fellow band members?
-
Read You Never Give Me Your Money by Peter Doggett. It's all explained in there.
-
Nancy R:
Read You Never Give Me Your Money by Peter Doggett. It's all explained in there.
Read a few things on line - but will have to pick up this book:-) But it sounds like he basically tried to strong arm Arm Klein privately into making corrections via a letter (which didn't work), then included it as one of the reasons included in his lawsuit as to why he was seeking to dissolve the Beatles... As an aside - I was reading some Phil Spector comments from much later on (not sure exactly when - but from a point in time where Paul had evidently been performing the song on tour with Wix adding synthetic strings)...calling Paul a hypocrite for criticizing his production work on the song while adding the same strings during his live performance....in my opinion, if he considers the light strings work performed by Wix as something close to the slop he added to an otherwise gorgeous song, he's nuts. Did he make these comments around the same time he was being tried for murder and was trying to find ways to be found insane?
-
Paul had a terrible fight over Let It Be with the other 3 and they would not budge. The album was released with the Spector versions over his objections. He did not take it lying down and the others fought back. He lost. The culmination was him suing to dissolve the Beatles partnership to free him and the others from Allen Klein's management. It lead to the total disintegration and all the public infighting for several years after that. Let It Be was finally released the way it was originally planned as Let It Be...Naked in 2003. Spector's version of The Long and Winding Road was The Beatles last number one single and sold several million. Obviously you can't argue with success, and Lennon really liked what Spector did. So the original version is on all the hits packages and the original Let It Be album is still available. I like the version with horns on Wings Over America best.
-
Rich, that ^ is the "Reader's Digest condensed version." You really need to read the book. There's lots more to it.
-
Nancy R:
Rich, that ^ is the "Reader's Digest condensed version." You really need to read the book. There's lots more to it.
Yeah read the book. That's only the Forum version. Or read Apple to the Core. Also a fascinating look at the final days of the group and into the solo years.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
Paul had a terrible fight over Let It Be with the other 3 and they would not budge. The album was released with the Spector versions over his objections. He did not take it lying down and the others fought back. He lost. The culmination was him suing to dissolve the Beatles partnership to free him and the others from Allen Klein's management. It lead to the total disintegration and all the public infighting for several years after that. Let It Be was finally released the way it was originally planned as Let It Be...Naked in 2003. Spector's version of The Long and Winding Road was The Beatles last number one single and sold several million. Obviously you can't argue with success, and Lennon really liked what Spector did. So the original version is on all the hits packages and the original Let It Be album is still available. I like the version with horns on Wings Over America best.
Yes, the WOA version is great!
-
The irony that everyone seems to forget regarding this episode is that Paul approved and signed off on an acetate of the album prior to its release. It wasn't until the scrum over the release date of LIB vs his own album that he decided to really make an issue of it.
-
DrBeatle:
The irony that everyone seems to forget regarding this episode is that Paul approved and signed off on an acetate of the album prior to its release. It wasn't until the scrum over the release date of LIB vs his own album that he decided to really make an issue of it.
That is why I said read the book.
-
rich n:
Nancy R:
Read You Never Give Me Your Money by Peter Doggett. It's all explained in there.
Read a few things on line - but will have to pick up this book:-) But it sounds like he basically tried to strong arm Arm Klein privately into making corrections via a letter (which didn't work), then included it as one of the reasons included in his lawsuit as to why he was seeking to dissolve the Beatles... As an aside - I was reading some Phil Spector comments from much later on (not sure exactly when - but from a point in time where Paul had evidently been performing the song on tour with Wix adding synthetic strings)...calling Paul a hypocrite for criticizing his production work on the song while adding the same strings during his live performance....in my opinion, if he considers the light strings work performed by Wix as something close to the slop he added to an otherwise gorgeous song, he's nuts. Did he make these comments around the same time he was being tried for murder and was trying to find ways to be found insane?
The version Paul and Wix have been doing lately is clearly related to the Spector arrangement, but done with actual taste. It's what Spector's version would have been if he had some class. That said, I'll take the WOA version anytime. As someone else said, it's my favorite version of the song, hands down.
-
I dont mind the strings on TLAWR, but Spector could have done a much better job of making them more melodic, imo. The original version just sounds so loud and boring. Very un-Spector-like. Surprised the song went to #1, but probably more of the nostalgic effect - the band had just broken up.
-
JoeySmith:
I dont mind the strings on TLAWR, but Spector could have done a much better job of making them more melodic, imo. The original version just sounds so loud and boring. Very un-Spector-like. Surprised the song went to #1, but probably more of the nostalgic effect - the band had just broken up.
Joey, we didn't know the band had broken up when Let It Be came out. Paul didn't sue them until Dec. 31, 1970, right? Yes: http://ultimateclassicrock.com/paul-mccartney-sues-to-breaks-up-the-beatles/ Plus, most fans did not realize until much later that Let It Be was actually recorded months before Abbey Road! So no nostalgia effect there--it was simply a great song! (which we also didn't know had been "Spectorized.")
P.S. I was 15 in 1970. -
Nancy R:
JoeySmith:
I dont mind the strings on TLAWR, but Spector could have done a much better job of making them more melodic, imo. The original version just sounds so loud and boring. Very un-Spector-like. Surprised the song went to #1, but probably more of the nostalgic effect - the band had just broken up.
Joey, we didn't know the band had broken up when Let It Be came out. Paul didn't sue them until Dec. 31, 1970, right? Yes: http://ultimateclassicrock.com/paul-mccartney-sues-to-breaks-up-the-beatles/ Plus, most fans did not realize until much later that Let It Be was actually recorded months before Abbey Road! So no nostalgia effect there--it was simply a great song! (which we also didn't know had been "Spectorized.")
P.S. I was 15 in 1970.We DID know the Beatles had broken up when the LAWR single was released in the United States on 11 May 1970, nearly a month after "McCartney" had come out and Paul said the Beatles were finished. And fans knew something was wrong. I was 14 and from the first time I heard it I said, "This just doesn't sound like a Beatles record somehow." I didn't know what had happened, but I knew something was wrong. And Spector was credited on the album, so folks could put two and two together.
-
Bruce M.:
Nancy R:
JoeySmith:
I dont mind the strings on TLAWR, but Spector could have done a much better job of making them more melodic, imo. The original version just sounds so loud and boring. Very un-Spector-like. Surprised the song went to #1, but probably more of the nostalgic effect - the band had just broken up.
Joey, we didn't know the band had broken up when Let It Be came out. Paul didn't sue them until Dec. 31, 1970, right? Yes: http://ultimateclassicrock.com/paul-mccartney-sues-to-breaks-up-the-beatles/ Plus, most fans did not realize until much later that Let It Be was actually recorded months before Abbey Road! So no nostalgia effect there--it was simply a great song! (which we also didn't know had been "Spectorized.")
P.S. I was 15 in 1970.We DID know the Beatles had broken up when the LAWR single was released in the United States on 11 May 1970, nearly a month after "McCartney" had come out and Paul said the Beatles were finished. And fans knew something was wrong. I was 14 and from the first time I heard it I said, "This just doesn't sound like a Beatles record somehow." I didn't know what had happened, but I knew something was wrong. And Spector was credited on the album, so folks could put two and two together.
Maybe you knew, but my friends and I didn't. We didn't scrutinize the record and see Spector's name like you did. I'm sure we were not alone in the U.S. and elsewhere in not really being sure what was going on. When McCartney came out, I didn't know about the 'interview' that he put out at the time (I only found out about that in recent years!) I'm sure the average fan had no clue either. P.S. May 11, 1970 was my 15th birthday, coincidently.
-
Two things I found perplexing as I grew up. One, learning that Jesus was actually Jewish. And, two, that Let it Be was not the last record.... well it was, but it wasn't. I am very fond of The Long and Winding Road, and am more than comfortable with the Spector version.
-
toris:
Two things I found perplexing as I grew up. One, learning that Jesus was actually Jewish. And, two, that Let it Be was not the last record.... well it was, but it wasn't. I am very fond of The Long and Winding Road, and am more than comfortable with the Spector version.
I was the same way!! (about both!) 
-
Nancy R:
Bruce M.:
Nancy R:
JoeySmith:
I dont mind the strings on TLAWR, but Spector could have done a much better job of making them more melodic, imo. The original version just sounds so loud and boring. Very un-Spector-like. Surprised the song went to #1, but probably more of the nostalgic effect - the band had just broken up.
Joey, we didn't know the band had broken up when Let It Be came out. Paul didn't sue them until Dec. 31, 1970, right? Yes: http://ultimateclassicrock.com/paul-mccartney-sues-to-breaks-up-the-beatles/ Plus, most fans did not realize until much later that Let It Be was actually recorded months before Abbey Road! So no nostalgia effect there--it was simply a great song! (which we also didn't know had been "Spectorized.")
P.S. I was 15 in 1970.We DID know the Beatles had broken up when the LAWR single was released in the United States on 11 May 1970, nearly a month after "McCartney" had come out and Paul said the Beatles were finished. And fans knew something was wrong. I was 14 and from the first time I heard it I said, "This just doesn't sound like a Beatles record somehow." I didn't know what had happened, but I knew something was wrong. And Spector was credited on the album, so folks could put two and two together.
Maybe you knew, but my friends and I didn't. We didn't scrutinize the record and see Spector's name like you did. I'm sure we were not alone in the U.S. and elsewhere in not really being sure what was going on. When McCartney came out, I didn't know about the 'interview' that he put out at the time (I only found out about that in recent years!) I'm sure the average fan had no clue either. P.S. May 11, 1970 was my 15th birthday, coincidently.
OK, I was only 5 at the time, so I don't actually remember it happening, but didn't Paul's "announcement" make news headlines around the world on April 10, 1970? Here's one:
Not trying to be snarky, Nancy, just trying to understand what it was actually like at the time! -
Fan reaction outside of Apple on April 10, 1970, being asked by a reporter about the Beatles' breakup:
Granted, they are "apple scruffs," and they are a bit harsh toward Linda! Interestingly, Yoko isn't mentioned; I thought for sure she'd be a target, too. (The young man at the end doesn't say anything.) By the way, another great "Long and Winding Road" moment for me was on the DVD of one of the recent tours, where the tour crew holds up all those heart signs and Paul gets choked up. -
favoritething:
Nancy R:
Bruce M.:
Nancy R:
JoeySmith:
I dont mind the strings on TLAWR, but Spector could have done a much better job of making them more melodic, imo. The original version just sounds so loud and boring. Very un-Spector-like. Surprised the song went to #1, but probably more of the nostalgic effect - the band had just broken up.
Joey, we didn't know the band had broken up when Let It Be came out. Paul didn't sue them until Dec. 31, 1970, right? Yes: http://ultimateclassicrock.com/paul-mccartney-sues-to-breaks-up-the-beatles/ Plus, most fans did not realize until much later that Let It Be was actually recorded months before Abbey Road! So no nostalgia effect there--it was simply a great song! (which we also didn't know had been "Spectorized.")
P.S. I was 15 in 1970.We DID know the Beatles had broken up when the LAWR single was released in the United States on 11 May 1970, nearly a month after "McCartney" had come out and Paul said the Beatles were finished. And fans knew something was wrong. I was 14 and from the first time I heard it I said, "This just doesn't sound like a Beatles record somehow." I didn't know what had happened, but I knew something was wrong. And Spector was credited on the album, so folks could put two and two together.
Maybe you knew, but my friends and I didn't. We didn't scrutinize the record and see Spector's name like you did. I'm sure we were not alone in the U.S. and elsewhere in not really being sure what was going on. When McCartney came out, I didn't know about the 'interview' that he put out at the time (I only found out about that in recent years!) I'm sure the average fan had no clue either. P.S. May 11, 1970 was my 15th birthday, coincidently.
OK, I was only 5 at the time, so I don't actually remember it happening, but didn't Paul's "announcement" make news headlines around the world on April 10, 1970? Here's one: http://chainedandperfumed.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/paul-quits.jpg Not trying to be snarky, Nancy, just trying to understand what it was actually like at the time!
Yes, I remember that article (and I have it in my scrapbook--well, one of them anyway!) but you have to understand that most of us thought, "Oh yeah, right. Paul is quitting the Beatles" and by the time we knew it was really true, maybe a year had passed! We kept thinking they'd get back together. Until Paul started Wings in late 1971--then I knew it was over.
-
favoritething:
Fan reaction outside of Apple on April 10, 1970, being asked by a reporter about the Beatles' breakup:
Granted, they are "apple scruffs," and they are a bit harsh toward Linda! Interestingly, Yoko isn't mentioned; I thought for sure she'd be a target, too. (The young man at the end doesn't say anything.)The "man" you mention was the interviewer. They were just filming from the girls' POV. (this was raw footage, not edited) Only the first girl (Margo?) was correct when she mentioned Allen Klein. How those girls blamed Linda is beyond me. If any wife was to blame it's Yoko!
