Let It Be... Naked | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 300 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614103
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
Let It Be... Naked
 

offline Zeus from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-11-18 14:28 [#00955950]
Points: 14042 Status: Lurker



Just picked up this "new" old beatles record.

and I say... thumbs up!



 

offline Monoid from one source all things depend on 2003-11-18 14:29 [#00955953]
Points: 11010 Status: Lurker



uhhh........y4k mixed by dj ils is better

sorry


 

offline AlfredPMcLovely from the country that will end up d (Turkmenistan) on 2003-11-18 14:42 [#00955972]
Points: 1158 Status: Lurker



Isn't it only a couple of tracks that have changes? Or has
the whole thing been remastered or something?


 

offline aphextriplet from your mothers bedroom (United Kingdom) on 2003-11-18 14:43 [#00955974]
Points: 4731 Status: Lurker



bring the funk


 

offline Zeus from San Francisco (United States) on 2003-11-18 14:48 [#00955978]
Points: 14042 Status: Lurker



all the tracks are pretty different

parts are there that where taken out, and vice versa

its the same takes I think... but without all of phil
spectors changes (which were alot)


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2003-11-18 15:50 [#00956060]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator



NAKED IN THE TITLE

NAKED NAKED NAKED NAKED


oh wait

it's Zeus

Zeus naked. oh no.


 

offline Fuckwagon from Dallas (United States) on 2003-11-18 15:52 [#00956062]
Points: 1304 Status: Lurker



do you buy into the marketing scheme behind this record?
like this is really how the beatles wanted it to sound? i
saw a promo for it and they were talking about how strings
waterd down the true soul within the songs... B.S.! *goes
to buy anyway*


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2003-11-18 15:53 [#00956064]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



*does the peter slappy dance that the black dude in kids
does*


 

offline magicant from Canada on 2003-11-18 15:59 [#00956078]
Points: 2465 Status: Lurker



yeah, paul mccartney is satisfied with the album for 35
years until one day he decides he's not.

i smell scam.


 

offline hevquip from megagram dusk sect (United States) on 2003-11-18 16:00 [#00956080]
Points: 3379 Status: Regular



i almost thought this topic was about leaving the "N A K E
D" topic alone.


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2003-11-18 16:55 [#00956140]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Followup to magicant: #00956078 | Show recordbag



Well, no, Paul has NEVER been happy about this album, he's
always been pissed off at Phil Spector for ''ruining it''
and has been stating it publically for 35 years...
particularly The Long and Winding Road. NEVER been
satisfied. It's amazing this hasn't been attempted (emphasis
on ATTEMPT) until now, it's been in demand by hardcore
Beatles fans since 1970. Not a scam at all... if they wanted
to scam us, they'd do it with an album like Pepper that
would GUARANTEE sales. This isn't going to be a heavy hitter
and isn't meant to be... it's for the fans and that's
actually pretty gracious of them. It's about damn time they
did something for real Beatles fans.

Despite the good intentions, they still failed though!

I'm scratching my head. It's not what the way it was
intended AT ALL... things from different takes are flown in,
solos rearranged, I even hear Ringo fixed a snare in one of
the songs... it's not what the Get Back album should have
been... it's more like a look at a classic album from a
different perspective... a Spector-less look.

Which automatically turns me off because Phil Spector is my
favorite producer of all time and I love the work he did on
every track except Across the Universe.

The album is interesting and doesn't ruin anything, it's
still a great listen and worthwhile to hear. But it's just
so... pointless. Misses the mark completely.

They need to remix and remaster the catalogue, starting with
Sgt. Pepper and Abbey Road to whet appetites, and then work
their way up chronologically up the catalogue. On SACD
format, with bonus tracks and fat booklets. Naked is a waste
of time and is false advertisting... as good as it is. And
is IS good, better in some places... Don't Let Me Down being
included was a masterstroke. But I guess I'm in the minority
that thinks LAWRoad isn't nearly as effective without the
Wall of Sound.

Across the Universe is the most interesting cut, but even
that probably isn't the way the song was intended. There has
and will NEVER b


 

offline Ophecks from Nova Scotia (Canada) on 2003-11-18 16:56 [#00956144]
Points: 19190 Status: Moderator | Show recordbag



Across the Universe is the most interesting cut, but even
that probably isn't the way the song was intended. There has
and will NEVER be a definitive version of that great song.
Weird.

Let it Be > Let it Be Naked

It's worth the money no matter who you are, but they could
have spent their energy on a more useful project, for sure.


 

offline magicant from Canada on 2003-11-18 17:05 [#00956153]
Points: 2465 Status: Lurker



pisses me off that some of the stupidest people are in
charge of the some of the greatest art this world has ever
seen.


 

offline Key from Bbbbarrow-in-f (United Kingdom) on 2003-11-18 17:06 [#00956155]
Points: 857 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ophecks: #00956140



I totally agree. The CDs were mastered in the mid-80s under
some bad conditions apparently and could do with a digital
cleanup. The lack of information and special edition
fan-type stuff on the cds is weird considering they are
regularly acknowledged as some of the best music ever
recorded.


 

offline wobbie on 2003-11-18 17:14 [#00956166]
Points: 9 Status: Regular



Good or not.
I'm very suspicious that this has been released in the run
up to christmas.
Has McCartney run out of funds?

But maybe thats just me being cynical. sorry.


 

offline zaphod from the metaverse on 2003-11-18 17:22 [#00956177]
Points: 4428 Status: Addict | Followup to wobbie: #00956166



hes a billionaire, so i doubt it. anyway, don't be so
cynical. as ophecks pointed out, this album has been in
demand for the better part of thirty years. i heard it
today, and i don't think it was done right at all, but it
isn't some shrewd marketing to fatten mcartneys already huge
bank account.


 


Messageboard index