The Beatles' "Love"

quote:

Originally posted by Malky:
However, it has blown me away. Storming stuff, it definitely brings something new to the party. Where the hell did those horns on Drive My Car come from?

According to Giles Martin, the horns are from Savoy Truffle. Very cool.

Likewise, I was blown away on first hearing, and my mind continues to be blown every time I listen. A singular masterpiece, really.

Fred

I agree that its a great fun CD, if falling a bit short of absolute must have in my opinion.

Certainly not one for people who don't know the Beatles well. I'm sure most of the listeners that have got it to the No 1 slot in the UK won't notice its anything other than a Beatles Mega-mix. We 'in-the-know' find the little inter-song signatures fascinating of course.

Am I the only one who feels the Martins became a bit bogged down 3/4 of the way through? The appearance of different disguised passages and mixes breaks down after a while and it does become more just one song blending into the next.

Jonathan

Jonathan, I have to say that I disagree with most of your comments, except that LOVE is a "great, fun CD," which it is.

First, I think it indeed is an "absolute must-have" ... it's a brilliant and singular work of music unlike anything else, thrilling and deep.

Secondly, I don't agree that it's only for those who know the Beatles catalogue well. Sure, it's big fun to identify the bits and pieces, but it also stands alone as a new album of music that holds up as well as anything in popular music, then or now.

By the way, there's much more going on than just the interludes between the songs ... there are parts (or all) of at least 100 different songs, and many are so well integrated as to render them nearly unidentifiable ... the Savoy Truffle horns on Drive My Car is only one such example. There's a lot more here than first, or even subsequently, meets the ear.

Also, the chronology of the making of an album like this doesn't correlate to the chronology of the sequence of the finished album ... 3/4 of the way through the album has no bearing on 3/4 of the way through the Martins' process. For instance, the very first piece created was Giles' marriage of Tomorrow Never Knows and Within You, Without You, offered as a "demo" of what the whole project might be for the approval of The Beatles and their estates. Of course, it's one of the most brilliant things on the album, and it's not surprising that everyone gave their blessing upon hearing it. But its position in the sequence of the album is half way through.

Further, it may seem as though the tracks which appear later on the album are "more just one song blending into the next," but, again, there's much more there which is revealed in subsequent listening. Give it a few more attentive spins and I'm sure you'll hear it.

Fred

IMO this 'Love' is great audio etc - can be bought for under £7 - I have played it once/been impressed with sonic messing-about/might buy proper versions of proper albums if eventually re-re whatevered.

I can quite understand people who insist on playing only original mono 1960s vinyl. (No I can't - record it/sell it/buy cheap CDs ...).

quote:

Originally posted by munch:
Imagine-The Beatles in Love ,indepth look at the creation of Love the music show .is on the BBC 27th Dec 2006 at 10.30pm.

Thanks mumch, I'll either set the VCR or be watching.

quote:

Originally posted by munch:
My other half got two tickets for the CIRQUE DE SOLEIL at the Royal Albert Hall months ago .she is taking her mum ,I wish i had known about the Beatles Love show when she asked me if i wanted to go. I would have said yes .regards munch

Munch, if it's any consolation, the Cirque/Beatles show is only in Las Vegas. The show at RAH is a different Cirque production.

Fred

I am still waiting for it to be released on vinyl.

A few more weeks, I'm told.

I have to wait until christmas day to listen as I bought it for SWMBO or more correctly Sally.

Munch,

I haven't listened to the DD/DTS 5.1 track. I have spent the last few days listening to the DVDA 9624 surround mix - yet another reason to be glad I got the DVDA module for the DVD5!

The surround channels are used sensibly to add ambience, with the main action centered at the front.

I just find myself continually edging up the volume!

Martin

quote:

Originally posted by munch:
I like what they have done, but it still sounds like a stars on 45 mix for me

Munch, I'm not familiar with Stars on 45 ... what exactly is it? Do they take myriad elements of one artist's songs and recombine them in creative and musically astute ways?

Fred

The Stars On 45 was a mix where they just bunged a bunch of early Beatles rockers (all at similar tempos) over a disco beat. No relation to Love at all, creatively.

Had our copy since christmas day and played it once. Guess that says it all really. Mind you I am not a great Beatles fan anyway.

Circe du Soleil shows look amazing though. Saw a documentary about "Ka" also in Vegas, stunning stage and acrobatics/coreography and cotumes.

Howard

Available in vinyl on Feb. 5.
LOVE

quote:

Originally posted by bhazen:
Now I hope Apple/EMI get on with finally remastering the canonical Beatles catalog.

Or dogalog.

Hi Bruce,

I agree with what you've said about Love, but I think the issue with the old catalogue is not the remastering as such.

I reckon a fair amount of the zip and punch on Love comes from the fact that the Martins were allowed to re-mix the tracks (for example the vocals tend to be centred now). I'm not sure the world/Beatles would want/allow the originals to be mucked about like that. Unfortunately. I think.

I have heard that discussions with Apple about releasing the Beatles original albums fully remastered are ongoing and that they will probably be released towards the end of the year (i.e just in time for Christmas 2007). So something to look forward to/fear, depending on your point of view.

Regards

Nic

quote:

Originally posted by nicnaim:
I have heard that discussions with Apple about releasing the Beatles original albums fully remastered...

I wonder what that means? I'm not doubting what you've heard, but if it's just remastering then I wonder what the gains will be? After all it was George Martin working from the master tapes that produced the current crop of CDs.

The only thing that will have changed in the interim will be better (I assume) ADC technology?

Gary,

This was the answer I got from a asking a mate who works in the industry (I need to be a bit careful here) when I asked about the rumours of remixed versions of the originals being released.

I already had the standard cd version of "Love" but was sent a copy of the surround sound DVD version for my amusement after I had commented that the remix had impressed me. To my mind, some of "Love" jumps out of the speakers at you in a way that the standard versions do not, hence my question about the back catalog.

My assumption is that this will be from the masters, and given the reaction to "Love" I would have thought that George, and more pertinently Giles, were in the frame.

Regards

Nic

I don't own a Beatles album, except for JL's first solo masterpiece and I've not heard and of Love, but having just run through this thread for the first time, the thing that comes to mind is the re-issuing of the Star Wars trilogy a few years ago. George Lucas cleaned up some of the computer graphics, inserted new scenes etc, and after a short buzz of excitment you found that the new versions were available at car boot sales for next to nothing, whilst the original versions were in even more demand. I'm all for improved sound quality, but I really don't feel comfortable when digital technology is used to f*ck with history.

Love isn't about improved sound quality (which is a side-effect), but creating something new and interesting on an artistic level - which it's succeeded in admirably.

quote:

new and interesting on an artistic level - which it's succeeded in admirably

I was in awe of this album when it came out and all the hype was flying. Its still fun and I put it on now and then as its in my 'next to the stereo pile' still, but the more I listen the more I think all this "artistic success" thing is a bridge too far. Its a mega mix.

Yes it is.


Yes it is.


...but it is.

Jonathan

PS I also venture that John and George are spinning in their graves whilst Paul and Ringo are just closing their eyes and counting the money coming in.

The problem, and the reason why Beatles fans clamour for proper remasterings, is that the original EMI CDs of The Beatles albums were so bad.

If anyone is in any doubt about that, just compare the (original) remix/remaster of 'Revolution' on Vol 2 of 'Past Masters' with the (new) remix/remaster on 'Love'. Both done under George Martin, but the difference is as night and day! You will hear, on the new version, that there were two heavily distorted guitars pounding out the tune. On the original, the only guitar comes from the right channel. On the remix, one plays lead in the right channel, while the other plays rhythm in the left. What was always a masterpiece is even better as a result.

So roll on the remixed/remastered Beatles, but no messing around with SACD layers, please!

Graham

quote:

Originally posted by Shayman:

I also venture that John and George are spinning in their graves whilst Paul and Ringo are just closing their eyes and counting the money coming in.

Really? Is that what you really believe? That despite their massive wealth, despite their unassailable legacy as uncompromising artists who have demonstrated a deep musical sensibility and a profound love of music, Paul and Ringo will put their name on any old thing just to make even more money? Is that truly what you believe?

Also, this whole project was the brainchild of George Harrison and his friend Guy Laliberté, founder of Cirque du Soleil ... why would George be "spinning in his grave"? Further, according to both George Martin and Yoko Ono, both of whom would likely know, John would have loved the creativity and experimentation of the project ... he, and the other Beatles, were always interested in creativity and experimentation. In fact, The Beatles were already doing this sort of thing in songs like Tomorrow Never Knows, Revolution No. 9, and the mash-up in the long fade of All You Need Is Love, with its Bach/Brandenburg snippets, Greensleeves, and She Loves You woven throughout.

Here's something Harrison's widow, Olivia, said in an interview, explaining George's "last great idea" ...

George instigated a meeting with Paul, George, Yoko, Ringo and Guy. Everyone wanted to have fun, be creative and have someone else be the vehicle for that.

If you listen to the BBC radio documentary on the making of the album, you'll hear repeated accounts of how concerned Paul and Ringo were that this would not be, in fact, just a mercenary project ... really, how could it ever be? They insisted that George and Giles Martin feel free to be as creative as possible. They are both enthusiastically excited about the results, and it had to be musically right before they would sign off ... it had absolutely nothing to do with money. I know it's fashionably cynical to believe otherwise, but it just ain't true.

To be frank, this knee-jerk cynical response has always been a source of bitter frustration for me. I feel like it comes primarily from those who are not artists and don't understand the artistic process, the artistic life, and how it feels and what it means to be an artist. Because anyone who has lived the artistic life knows how difficult a life it is, how much of one's soul is on the line, how much heartache there can be, and how much elation and deep satisfaction comes from making good art. For such a person to just abandon their hard won standards, to betray their artistic drive, a drive which is every bit as elemental as breathing, and just do something for the money, is absurd.

All best,
Fred

quote:

Originally posted by graham55:
The problem, and the reason why Beatles fans clamour for proper remasterings, is that the original EMI CDs of The Beatles albums were so bad.

If anyone is in any doubt about that, just compare the (original) remix/remaster of 'Revolution' on Vol 2 of 'Past Masters' with the (new) remix/remaster on 'Love'. Both done under George Martin, but the difference is as night and day! You will hear, on the new version, that there were two heavily distorted guitars pounding out the tune. On the original, the only guitar comes from the right channel. On the remix, one plays lead in the right channel, while the other plays rhythm in the left. What was always a masterpiece is even better as a result.

So roll on the remixed/remastered Beatles, but no messing around with SACD layers, please!

Graham

But that was the point of my earlier post. Is it artistically right to remix the original albums rather than just remaster to obtain better Hi-Fi at the risk of altering the musical content, if you know what I mean.

Jonathan, I've with Fred all the way I'm afraid. You're free to like the album to whatever degree you like, but I think you're wrong in your thoughts on the motives and reactions.

quote:

Originally posted by Gary Shaw:
Jonathan, I've with Fred all the way I'm afraid. You're free to like the album to whatever degree you like, but I think you're wrong in your thoughts on the motives and reactions.

Well we don't know and probably never will know their motives and re-actions, but I'm sure most people could hazard a guess at John Lennon's reaction to the greater part of his lifes work being re-worked and used as a sound track to a Las Vagas cirus show, no matter how brillant a show it may be.

If this is ok though, what's next ? perhaps those sacred Robert Johnston tracks could be squeezed for a bit more juice, or Nick Drake's meagre three album score could be improved ?