How badly were Paul's hands tied? (re spectorized LAWR)
-
Nancy R:
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:
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.
Thanks, Nancy! I know, it was a very complicated time. I appreciate your insight, and I don't want to appear insensitive in the least. I asked my husband (who's a few years older) what he remembers, and his parents were pretty anti-Beatles at the time , so they just thought, "Oh, those drug addicts, whatever!" or something to that effect. I take for granted how beloved they are now!
-
Nancy R:
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!
That's been refuted over and over by everyone including John and Paul. It was not the wives fault. John broke up The Beatles in Sept 1969. Paul announced it to the public 7 months later.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
Nancy R:
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!
That's been refuted over and over by everyone including John and Paul. It was not the wives fault. John broke up The Beatles in Sept 1969. Paul announced it to the public 7 months later.
John decided to quit the Beatles, mostly because he wanted to do his thing with Yoko. I still believe, as do many others, that Yoko played a significant role in the breakup. The other 3 could not stand the fact that John had her in the studio with them, and that caused tensions. Do you seriously think that if John had never met Yoko he would have done some of the things he did? Hell, he might still be alive today! Who knows? The other part was the Allen Klein vs. the Eastmans thing. Have you read You Never Give Me Your Money by Peter Doggett? You should if you haven't. He goes into great detail on the whole thing and clears up a lot. P.S. Of course John would say that Yoko didn't break up the Beatles! And Paul, I know said it too recently, but he's just being PC (you know Paul) I can't say on here what Paul probably really thinks of her.
-
I think Yoko's presence in the studio didn't help, but I believe it was the Allen Klein situation that really sealed it. They were at an impasse as to how to proceed as a business.
-
Nancy R:
beatlesfanrandy:
Nancy R:
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!
That's been refuted over and over by everyone including John and Paul. It was not the wives fault. John broke up The Beatles in Sept 1969. Paul announced it to the public 7 months later.
John decided to quit the Beatles, mostly because he wanted to do his thing with Yoko. I still believe, as do many others, that Yoko played a significant role in the breakup. The other 3 could not stand the fact that John had her in the studio with them, and that caused tensions. Do you seriously think that if John had never met Yoko he would have done some of the things he did? Hell, he might still be alive today! Who knows? The other part was the Allen Klein vs. the Eastmans thing. Have you read You Never Give Me Your Money by Peter Doggett? You should if you haven't. He goes into great detail on the whole thing and clears up a lot. P.S. Of course John would say that Yoko didn't break up the Beatles! And Paul, I know said it too recently, but he's just being PC (you know Paul) I can't say on here what Paul probably really thinks of her.
I couldn't agree with this statement more. Many many people agree. There are bumper stickers, tshirts & everything...here...Vince Gill...BIG Beatles fan. 
-
The "Spectorized" version of the TLAWR was always one Beatles song that I couldn't stand. I've never read the Doggett book, but one thing I've read is that John seemed to harbor some resentment towards George Martin because he thought Martin spent more time with Paul in the studio than John. Martin says that was because Paul spent more time in the studio than John in the latter years of the Beatles. I've seen that as a reason why Spector produced "Let It Be" and not George Martin. I still think it is odd that Paul wasn't allowed any input on the production of TLAWR I will try to see if the Doggett book is in the local library to see if that book has a different outlook on the "Spectorization" of TLAWR.
-
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
-
wingsdgm:
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
What do you mean, the Red Apple on the album (instead of green?) What did it mean? Sorry, I know how you felt. My parents split up the first time when I was about 11, but Mom came back and stayed another 7 years (I know it was just for me) and made it legal a year later in '74.
-
Nancy R:
wingsdgm:
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
What do you mean, the Red Apple on the album (instead of green?) What did it mean? Sorry, I know how you felt. My parents split up the first time when I was about 11, but Mom came back and stayed another 7 years (I know it was just for me) and made it legal a year later in '74.
I can't remember for sure, but I think each of the Beatles had a preferred colour for the apple. It wasn't always green. But I cannot recall all the facts.
-
toris:
Nancy R:
wingsdgm:
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
What do you mean, the Red Apple on the album (instead of green?) What did it mean? Sorry, I know how you felt. My parents split up the first time when I was about 11, but Mom came back and stayed another 7 years (I know it was just for me) and made it legal a year later in '74.
I can't remember for sure, but I think each of the Beatles had a preferred colour for the apple. It wasn't always green. But I cannot recall all the facts.
From The Beatles Wiki: "However, on the U.S. issue of the Beatles' Let It Be album, the Granny Smith apple was red. The reason was that in the United States that album, being the soundtrack to the movie of the same name, was, for contractual reasons, being manufactured and distributed by United Artists Records and not Capitol Records, so the red apple was used to mark the difference." Does anyone have the same recollection that I do about this album, that in the late '70s there were always piles of this album in the bargain bin? That's when I bought it.
-
toris:
Nancy R:
wingsdgm:
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
What do you mean, the Red Apple on the album (instead of green?) What did it mean? Sorry, I know how you felt. My parents split up the first time when I was about 11, but Mom came back and stayed another 7 years (I know it was just for me) and made it legal a year later in '74.
I can't remember for sure, but I think each of the Beatles had a preferred colour for the apple. It wasn't always green. But I cannot recall all the facts.
ps. Nancy, at your suggestion, I am going to read You Neve Give Me Your Money.... I downloaded a sample and it contains the chapter on how the other Beatles all reacted to John's death. I hate reading about that, depresses the shite out of me, but I'm half way through it. I reckon once I get through that chapter, I'll be able to read the rest of the book. It's sounds like a fascinating insight into the "business" of music. Unknowingly, everything that happened with the Beatles probably opened the way for all the musicians now getting their right fill out of the music industry. The Beatles yet again proving to be another huge part of history.
-
favoritething:
toris:
Nancy R:
wingsdgm:
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
What do you mean, the Red Apple on the album (instead of green?) What did it mean? Sorry, I know how you felt. My parents split up the first time when I was about 11, but Mom came back and stayed another 7 years (I know it was just for me) and made it legal a year later in '74.
I can't remember for sure, but I think each of the Beatles had a preferred colour for the apple. It wasn't always green. But I cannot recall all the facts.
From The Beatles Wiki: "However, on the U.S. issue of the Beatles' Let It Be album, the Granny Smith apple was red. The reason was that in the United States that album, being the soundtrack to the movie of the same name, was, for contractual reasons, being manufactured and distributed by United Artists Records and not Capitol Records, so the red apple was used to mark the difference." Does anyone have the same recollection that I do about this album, that in the late '70s there were always piles of this album in the bargain bin? That's when I bought it.
I kinda seem to remember that the 62-66 album had a red apple.... but I'm going on a hazy memory.... I was just a darn fool kid.
-
toris:
favoritething:
toris:
Nancy R:
wingsdgm:
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
What do you mean, the Red Apple on the album (instead of green?) What did it mean? Sorry, I know how you felt. My parents split up the first time when I was about 11, but Mom came back and stayed another 7 years (I know it was just for me) and made it legal a year later in '74.
I can't remember for sure, but I think each of the Beatles had a preferred colour for the apple. It wasn't always green. But I cannot recall all the facts.
From The Beatles Wiki: "However, on the U.S. issue of the Beatles' Let It Be album, the Granny Smith apple was red. The reason was that in the United States that album, being the soundtrack to the movie of the same name, was, for contractual reasons, being manufactured and distributed by United Artists Records and not Capitol Records, so the red apple was used to mark the difference." Does anyone have the same recollection that I do about this album, that in the late '70s there were always piles of this album in the bargain bin? That's when I bought it.
I kinda seem to remember that the 62-66 album had a red apple.... but I'm going on a hazy memory.... I was just a darn fool kid.
The apple on 62-66 is green, but the background around the edge is red (instead of the usual black); and 67-70 has a green apple with a blue background. Just checked!
-
favoritething:
toris:
favoritething:
toris:
Nancy R:
wingsdgm:
I liked the RED APPLE, Didnt know what it meant till later ...sad part , My Mom and Dad split up a month later ...Hard Times for a 10 year old
What do you mean, the Red Apple on the album (instead of green?) What did it mean? Sorry, I know how you felt. My parents split up the first time when I was about 11, but Mom came back and stayed another 7 years (I know it was just for me) and made it legal a year later in '74.
I can't remember for sure, but I think each of the Beatles had a preferred colour for the apple. It wasn't always green. But I cannot recall all the facts.
From The Beatles Wiki: "However, on the U.S. issue of the Beatles' Let It Be album, the Granny Smith apple was red. The reason was that in the United States that album, being the soundtrack to the movie of the same name, was, for contractual reasons, being manufactured and distributed by United Artists Records and not Capitol Records, so the red apple was used to mark the difference." Does anyone have the same recollection that I do about this album, that in the late '70s there were always piles of this album in the bargain bin? That's when I bought it.
I kinda seem to remember that the 62-66 album had a red apple.... but I'm going on a hazy memory.... I was just a darn fool kid.
The apple on 62-66 is green, but the background around the edge is red (instead of the usual black); and 67-70 has a green apple with a blue background. Just checked!
I could've checked.... but I was too lazy! Although I had an excuse. It was 111 degrees yesterday and I was sapped of all energy. Still am!
-
toris:
I could've checked.... but I was too lazy! Although I had an excuse. It was 111 degrees yesterday and I was sapped of all energy. Still am!
Poor baby! We are freezing our arses off in this hemisphere though!
Even in the "sunny South" (Atlanta) it is only 33 right now. 
-
Nancy R:
toris:
I could've checked.... but I was too lazy! Although I had an excuse. It was 111 degrees yesterday and I was sapped of all energy. Still am!
Poor baby! We are freezing our arses off in this hemisphere though!
Even in the "sunny South" (Atlanta) it is only 33 right now. I know! I work for an American company based east and they've been telling me how cold it is. I'm on the other end of the phone telling them we've had four to five days in a row near 111 degrees. The cool change arrived about an hour ago, so it's a bit more comfortable, but it's set to rise again next week. The weather is crazy on both sides of the planet right about now.
-
toris:
Nancy R:
toris:
I could've checked.... but I was too lazy! Although I had an excuse. It was 111 degrees yesterday and I was sapped of all energy. Still am!
Poor baby! We are freezing our arses off in this hemisphere though!
Even in the "sunny South" (Atlanta) it is only 33 right now. I know! I work for an American company based east and they've been telling me how cold it is. I'm on the other end of the phone telling them we've had four to five days in a row near 111 degrees. The cool change arrived about an hour ago, so it's a bit more comfortable, but it's set to rise again next week. The weather is crazy on both sides of the planet right about now.
It's 12°F right now in Chicago. And that's without the windchill. brrrr
-
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.
Yeah, Let it Be Naked got played once by me, then tossed in the trash. I had such high hopes.
-
Fan4-45years:
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.
Yeah, Let it Be Naked got played once by me, then tossed in the trash. I had such high hopes.
I thought it was fine, but it wasn't really the way it was originally envisioned: no "Rocker / Save The Last Dance" or "Teddy Boy" or full "Dig It", etc., and many of the tracks are combinations of different takes. Sounds great, but not "The Beatles as nature intended."
-
Fan4-45years:
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.
Yeah, Let it Be Naked got played once by me, then tossed in the trash. I had such high hopes.
I like both versions. (plus, I would never throw anything Beatles-related away!)
