Thought on Love

I have followed The Beatles ever since the fall of 1963 when I at 10 saw a clip of them on the Jack Parr show. I've owned anything and everything I could ever get my hands on, from the original Capitol USA albums, to the British EMI recordings, the EPs, all kinds of bootlegs, imports, 45s, everything. I considered them the greatest recording artists of all time and still do.

When I first listened to a few of the "Love" songs a few days ago, I was a little perplexed and today with much anticipation I purchased a copy of the album, listened to it a half dozen times already and have concluded the following:

1 - George Martin himself must have had less to do with it than even he admits to. After all, how COULD the genius of The Beatles ever have produced such a trash heap?

2 - Get approval from a man who doesn't have the sense to resist marrying a woman half his age, another man who basically went along for the ride all those years, a woman who for some strange reason considers herself some kind of artist but always was more interested in just shocking people, and another woman who well, god knows what she has to do with any of this, and you will get a product that is not much more than a convoluted bunch of noise added on to some of the best music ever recorded.

Don't get me wrong, there is some good to the album called "Love". If nothing else it makes a case to finally, for once and for all, release the entire Beatle catalogue in glorious remastered splendor. Some of the tracks sound far better than they ever did 40 years ago. The progression into "Revolution" from the intro of the original "Revolution Number Nine" is pure genius but sadly, that's about where it all ends. On most all the rest of the tracks, with very little exception, I keep wanting to turn the volume down or to somehow find a way to drown out all the unwanted noise, sounds, and additions borrowed from other songs. On the rare occasion where something fairly good IS apparent, such as "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" a more sensible rationalization concludes that this rendition of that song totally destroys its entire meaning and shows a complete lack of understanding in regards to the original guitar riffs. Another fairly successful attempt is "Eleanore Rigby" though as I listen, all I can think of is Paul's "Give My Regards to Broadstreet" which took this song to a higher and more complete level. The entire album gives me the impression that all that was really done here was an attempt to put as much Beatle sounds as possible into this one album without any real thought being given to the ramifications of such a gesture. It is even more overproduced than the "Let It Be" album, the one that was handed over to Phil Spector to make something of, the one which 30 some odd years later was more or less replaced with the far better and raw version called "Let It Be...Naked." Yes, "Love" is like taking things backwards once again, adding way too much production which does nothing to add to the music which lies underneath.

However, if I may sum up my feelings about this album with one very straight question to George Martin........

You mention in the notes that "Come Together" is one of their very greatest songs. WHY then was it pretty much the only song on the entire album which was left almost completely intact? Doesn't this say something? Doesn't it suggest that maybe the song is too good to be bastardized the way most all the others have been?

Personally, I think most all the songs on this album are as good as "Come Together." For God sake, when are all of you who are so close and associated with the greatest music group of all time going to realize that you just need to leave well enough alone? When The Beatles went back into the studio to record Abbey Road, they did so with the intent of going out with a winner as their swan song. They ended up producing their most polished album ever. They rejected the original Let It Be (Get Back) tapes knowing full well that it was not up to their standards. Why have the ensuing years allowed their failures to be shown to the public? Why have we been given the opportunity to see what was left on the cutting room floor ("Anothology")? Why have we now taken the masterpieces and reworked them as if they were Picassos which we have cut and paste into another work altogether? Are the financial rewards THAT enticing?

To all of you associated with The Beatles as producers, engineers, associates, or to Paul and Ringo yourselves....

It's time to let it be my friends! You seemed to have had this attitude 30 years ago when you knew it was over. What's happened since then?

Please.
Let it be.

I think Love is a way of following up the huge success of One and if it's announcing a release of remixed stereo versions of the early CDs then I'm all for it.
What bothers me a bit is that we have Get Back on the third CD in a row but on the positive side the disc is mainly Lennon and quite a lot of George, which makes a change.
If it means some younger listeners are going to discover I Am The Walrus for the first time then it can't be all bad.

Welcome to Beatlelinks, californiajay! Since you're interested in discussing an album, I think this topic would fit better in And Your Bird Can Sing. I'll move it there.

Edit: I see there's already another topic on Love here. Mods, what do you want to do?

You're obviously very passionate about the (original) music of The Beatles which is something we all share on here, however I feel it is slightly indignified to launch a semi-personal attack on Paul & Co as you have done in point 2- just because you feel bitter about the outcome of the album.
I thoroughly understand you're points and no doubt a lot of folk may agree with them. I also think a lot of people ( possibly the uninitiated??)may be dissapointed with this album- purely because of their preconceptions of a "greatest hits" compilation. HOWEVER! I think the point is being missed- treat this album as its meant to be - an experience - just like the Love Stage Production (which I have seen).
After all, it is the soundtrack to the show and does not pretend to be anything else.
Can I make a recommendation? Relax, have a beer-or 3, and listen to this album in full in 5.1 DTS surround sound. You may then find The Inner Light.

[quote=californiajay;646836]Get approval from a man who doesn't have the sense to resist marrying a woman half his age, another man who basically went along for the ride all those years[quote]

Sorry to sound harsh, but I have a real problem with this, the way you cut down Paul & Ringo. Especially the comment about Ringo. That's just sad if you are a Beatles fan & see Ringo as someone who was just "along for the ride."

Originally Posted by californiajay

You mention in the notes that "Come Together" is one of their very greatest songs. WHY then was it pretty much the only song on the entire album which was left almost completely intact? Doesn't this say something? Doesn't it suggest that maybe the song is too good to be bastardized the way most all the others have been?

So basicly what you wanted was the songs as they were originally, meaning another compilation cd?
I think you could know beforehand what you will buying. It's a soundtrack to the love stage show, not a best off release.The songs are mash ups, not the original recordings, but that's something you knew before hand. There were plenty of samples you could hear on different sites. So take it for what it is and review it as such or don't buy it at all.
I agree it doesn't work on all the songs, and certainly I hope it will be the last of such releases and that the U.K. remasters is next. Is it a bad release and shouldn't they have bother at all, imo the answer is no. I enjoy most of it and I am sure lots of people will.

What shouldn't have been release. No offense but if you're against "Love" so much I can't see how you can aprove of an album created mostly with pro tools, that sounds so unnatural and not at all raw like you put it.

I also I agree with pepperland67 about the way you cut down Paul & Ringo. Not really needed and nor is it fair.

Oyou made some clear and some really good thoughtout points in your post, but is it really necessary to post it on a beatle board where you know you'll get some negative reinforcement? Sorry to say this but, save it to some people who will listen to your whinning.

I don't agree with much of what CA-Jay said. It's just a novelty album, man. Get a grip! They didn't do any of The Beatles any kind of dis-service with these imaginative re-mixes. I think "Love" is a very unique and pleasant alternative to the original recordings that we all know and love. Like, a breath of fresh air. You have to appreciate the way George & Giles personalized some of the guys trademark songs to reflect their personalities. The Julia transition that is so beautifully etherial, then goes into a crazy mish mosh of sounds. This, to me, were the two sides of John. His constant inner struggle between good and evil. Then you have George's Here Comes The Sun done Indian style. We all *know* that George would have dug that one! Big time!Finally, you have to love John's greeting at the end of the cd. It's very moving. The true leader of the group saying, "Goodnight & God bless you all". A very nice touch. You can tell that "Love" was done with love and respect. My message to the Martins? "BRAVO, George & Giles! A job well done!"
While I'm at it. My message to Neil Aspinall: "Stop throwing us these measly bones and give us what we really want! It's high time to re-master and re-release Let It Be on dvd, once and for all!"

Originally Posted by californiajay

On the rare occasion where something fairly good IS apparent, such as "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" a more sensible rationalization concludes that this rendition of that song totally destroys its entire meaning and shows a complete lack of understanding in regards to the original guitar riffs.

Everyone's entitled to their opinions but this is the one point I have to disagree with you on. Personally I feel that "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" is better realised on the "Love" album, and if anything it was overproduced in the first place. Since when did the idea of "gently weeping" include an electric guitar solo? Clapton does a fantastic job but it just doesn't fit the sombre mood of the song. But that's just my thought.

As for the album itself, there is no doubt it is a money spinner, I think it is interesting as a remix, but it would be nice to have some remasters after all these years. I think like many other people have noted it really needs to be examined for what it is, unfortunately due to the familiarity and connection that people have with Beatle songs, any use that is "remixed" or changed in any manner is immeadiately seen as heresy. Based on your presumption, Paul and Ringo are using "their" songs is an unacceptable way, but I feel they can do what they want with them, after all they did write and perform on them. Personally I doubt that John or George would have objected had they known George Martin was involved.

Originally Posted by Magill

My message to Neil Aspinall: "Stop throwing us these measly bones and give us what we really want! It's high time to re-master and re-release Let It Be on dvd, once and for all!"

Agreed. But, the only thing I would add to that is a re-edit of some of the scenes. Why not add some scenes with Linda, not because she's gone but because she was there. Might be apropos to show some more of the band doing some more songs and less arguing. As the film stands now it's a document of the arguing that brought their end, not the intended feature about how they worked together as a band.

Originally Posted by Blackguard

Agreed. But, the only thing I would add to that is a re-edit of some of the scenes. Why not add some scenes with Linda, not because she's gone but because she was there. Might be apropos to show some more of the band doing some more songs and less arguing. As the film stands now it's a document of the arguing that brought their end, not the intended feature about how they worked together as a band.

From what I've seen, there's not a whole lot of argueing anyway. I don't know what the big deal is really. I know George was against putting this out. So he had a rift with Paul. So what? I think the elements of being in an unfamiliar setting, being constantly filmed and being there early in the mornings made tensions high for them all. Maybe not such a great idea filming it at Twickenham to begin with but the idea behind it was a good one. I think it's unfair to withhold this historic film in its entirety(!) from the fans. After all, we have footage of how it all began and progressed. Now, why not footage of how it all drew to a close? Just my opinion.

Personally I may have some mixed feelings about Love too. Was it too much hyped before the release? If we look at some old posts here some people say that they are rather sceptical about Beatles 'supermixes' and 'mash-ups'. The song that really got a hold on me was "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" too.

But on the positive side, Love allows us to see Beatles as if they had been able to 'overproduce' their albums in the sixties. I have always dreamed about some kind of mash-up from their songs that were created on their most productive period, late 1966 to early 1968, and this actually is what Love is too with little more other stuff.

Before I went to store to buy Love I did prepare to listen it as an alternate mix. I listened through "She Loves You" on all formats I had it: Past Masters 1 (1987), The Beatles 1962-66 (1993), #1 (2000) and Capitol Mono (2005). I noted the differences and trained my ear for the new experience.

Love does not bring anybody back but at least it is as a record a huge masterpiece. Something that is solid and as such a better end to the whole epic than the Fragmentary Anthology pieces.

Originally Posted by Blackguard

Agreed. But, the only thing I would add to that is a re-edit of some of the scenes. Why not add some scenes with Linda, not because she's gone but because she was there. Might be apropos to show some more of the band doing some more songs and less arguing. As the film stands now it's a document of the arguing that brought their end, not the intended feature about how they worked together as a band.

I disagree. Why rewrite history?

I think Love is fantastic. There are some songs/moments I don't care for (I've listened to it several times and I still hate the "Know what you're doing" transition), but overall, it's a fantastic release.

My biggest complaint is that they didn't utilize more of the "Good Night" strings on "Octopus's Garden," I thought that was fantastic. Here's hoping there's a single with some new mash-ups.

Just based on one listen...it's "interesting". I'm not sure it's necessary, but hey, who cares. I enjoyed listening to it, there were a couple of "oh, hey cool" moments, but I doubt it's something I'm going to return to over and over again.

Originally Posted by Magill

My message to Neil Aspinall: "Stop throwing us these measly bones and give us what we really want! It's high time to re-master and re-release Let It Be on dvd, once and for all!"

"F**kin' A!"
--Aerosmith, Just Push Play

Originally Posted by Rellevart

I enjoyed listening to it, there were a couple of "oh, hey cool" moments, but I doubt it's something I'm going to return to over and over again.

i think this will be the true test- in 5-10 years, how often will you listen to LOVE...especially after the remastering?

Funny...I often thought that when someone said something was "interesting," that was an obvious euphemism for "I didn't like it."

Originally Posted by beatlebangs1964

Funny...I often thought that when someone said something was "interesting," that was an obvious euphemism for "I didn't like it."

Well, that's certainly not the way I meant it. When I say "interesting", I mean "interesting". Go figure, actually meaning what I say.