Cover artwork
The Beatles' albums had been treated to a wealth of iconic images during the 1960s, from Robert Freeman's photography on With The Beatles, A Hard Day's Night, Beatles For Sale, Help! and Rubber Soul, to the artworks by Klaus Voormann, Peter Blake and Richard Hamilton on their 1966-68 releases.
Let It Be, when it eventually emerged, featured portraits of each of The Beatles, taken during the recording sessions, separated by thick black bars. The meaning was clear: the group was no longer together. They were not even named on the cover, and the words Let It Be starkly underlined that it was the group's epitaph.
On the back cover there were four more black and white portraits, along with a few words attempting to preserve the myth that Let It Be showed The Beatles warts and all:
This is a new phase BEATLES album...
Essential to the content of the film, LET IT BE was that they performed live for many of the tracks; in comes the warmth and the freshness of a live performance; as reproduced for disc by Phil Spector.
In a November 1971 interview with Melody Maker, Paul McCartney spoke of his disapproval of the words, which he felt masked a greater truth.
There was a bit of hype on the back of the sleeve for the first time ever on a Beatles album. At the time, the Beatles were very strained with each other and it wasn't a happy time. It said it was a 'new-phase Beatles album' and there was nothing further from the truth. That was the last Beatles album and everybody knew it.
Melody Maker, November 1971
His comments prompted a letter of reply from John Lennon, who requested that his version of events be given equal prominence to McCartney's. The result was an unseemly public row between the two, which, although mostly focused on wider issues, effectively trampled the reputation of Let It Be further into the ground.
One other little lie in your "It's only Paulie" MM bit: Let It Be was not the first bit of hype on a Beatle album. Remember Tony Barrow? And his wonderful writing on "Please Please Me" etc. etc. The early Beatle Xmas records!And you gotta admit it was a 'new-phase' Beatle album, incidentally written in the style of the great Barrow himself! By the way, what happened to my idea of putting the parody of our first album cover on the Let It Be cover?
Also, we were intending to parody Barrow originally, so it was hype. But what is your LIFE article? Tony Barrow couldn't have done it better. (And your writing inside of the Wings album [Wild Life] isn't exactly the realist is it?) Anyway, enough of this petty bourgeois fun.
Melody Maker, November 1971
Critical reception
Let It Be won an Oscar for Best Original Song Score at the 43rd Annual Academy Awards in 1971. The statuette was accepted on their behalf by Quincy Jones. The soundtrack was also awarded a Grammy for Best Original Score.
Music critics were generally positive in their appraisals of Let It Be, though responses were mixed. In the Times newspaper, William Mann wrote: "Let us attend the funeral when life is pronounced extinct; at the moment the corporate vitality of The Beatles, to judge from Let It Be, is pulsating as strongly as ever." Similarly, Robert Christgau in the Village Voice said: "Though this is a little lightweight, it makes up in charm what it lacks in dramatic brilliance."
Conversely, New Musical Express critic Alan Smith wrote: "If the new Beatles soundtrack is to be their last then it will stand as a cheapskate epitaph, a cardboard tombstone, a sad and tatty end to a musical fusion which wiped clean and drew again the face of pop." Rolling Stone magazine identified Phil Spector's production as the album's weakness: "Musically, boys, you passed the audition. In terms of having the judgment to avoid either over-producing yourselves or casting the fate of your get-back statement to the most notorious of all over-producers, you didn't."
Although most Beatles fans were aware that the group was no more by the time of Let It Be's release, it was still hoped that their final musical word would be a suitable epitaph, one as creative as Abbey Road had been, and with the drama and gravitas that might be expected of a final word. Instead, many listeners considered the songs lightweight, half-hearted, and several steps down from The Beatles' earlier heady heights.
In the years since then, the album has been embraced by newer generations of fans, many of whom remain unaware of the difficulties surrounding its gestation. Although few would argue that For You Blue, Dig It or Maggie Mae are among The Beatles' best, the likes of Across The Universe, Let It Be and One After 909 show the range of styles to which they could turn their hands to. And, let us not forget, even if the collection wasn't The Beatles' best, for many lesser bands these songs would have constituted a career peak.
Related articles:
- Mixing, editing: Get Back LP
- Mixing, master compilation: Let It Be, Get Back LP
- Mixing: The Long And Winding Road, Let It Be
- Mixing: Get Back, Teddy Boy, Two Of Us, Dig A Pony, I've Got A Feeling, The Long And Winding Road, Let It Be, Rocker, Save The Last Dance For Me, Don't Let Me Down, For You Blue, The Walk
- Glyn Johns compiles the second Get Back LP
Let It Be, Naked or Not has two of Paul's most long winded and nail scrapes aganst the blacboard. After seeing Anthology this past week, i forgot how he was the most annoying of the Beatles. Let It Be and Long and Winding Road could have ended a lot soone, but no, the camera's were rolling. Let It Be was a recording of the breakup of a band and these two songs were the blueprint.
If you don't like Paul McCartney then you don't like the Beatles. Let it Be and Long and Winding Road are too of Paul's masterpieces -as well as being two of the best songs on the Album. Really silly post..
Being brand spanking new to this particular Beatles site, I was just fixing a whole wear the rain gets in, when I suddenly found meself wonderin', In 2003 there was mention that the Let It Be film was about to be released. This film was last screened on British BBC2, Television in about 1982. A Saturday, If I recall... But is it any closer to being released. Any ideas???
Engineers started remastering the film a while back but decided the film was too "controversial". Paul and Ringo do not want it released either. I doubt it will be released any time soon, especially during Paul, Ringo, Yoko Ono and Olivia Harrison's lifetimes.
The whole album and sessions and film and all is so polemic!
Here's why LIB doesn't work for me - and this may be picky but here goes: because it is supposed to be the soundtrack to a movie and was intended to replicate the feel of live performances, the problem I have is this - listen through head phones and notice how many times John's voice is on one side and his guitar is on the other side.
This completely wrecks the feel of a live performance. At least for me.
Sorry I can't help but notice it.
Does anyone know if Paul fixed this on LIBN - I don't have that CD.
It shouldn't really make a difference. With multitrack recording, a live performance can be taped with simultaneously-played instruments routed to different tracks, which can then be mixed to different parts of the stereo spectrum. Of course, that's not to say that all of the LIB performances were live - there were a number of overdubs added once they'd thrown the 'live' concept out of the window.
"marked a move away from The Beatles' elaborate studio experimentation of 1966 and 1967, with a return to more straightforward rock and roll, and the White Album and much of the Yellow Submarine soundtrack had followed in a similar vein."
I wouldn't say much of the Yellow Submarine soundtrack was back to basics. There were 13 songs: 2 were repeats from previous albums/singles, 7 were George Martin's orchestra songs, 2 were George Harrison's songs neither of which sound back to basics, so that leaves 2 new Lennon-McCartney songs which could be called back to basics.
And certainly not all the White Albums was back to basics – Revolution 9, Wild Honey Pie.
I was referring to the 'new' songs on the YS soundtrack, though it probably needs clarifying. Certainly Hey Bulldog and All Together Now were a step away from their sound of 1967, though the George Harrison songs clearly aren't.
As for the White Album, you're right that there were some complex recordings on there, but nothing like to the same degree of Sgt Pepper or Strawberry Fields Forever. Much of it is fairly straightforward, thought with liberal doses of Beatles magic.
"And, let us not forget, even if the collection wasn't The Beatles' best, for many lesser bands these songs would have constituted a career peak."
Couldn't agree more. When fans always talk about this isn't good or whatever, what we really mean is compared to The Beatles' other stuff it isn't as good, but it is still amazing.
Sorry Joe, but it does matter whether lennon's voalcs and guitar are on the same stereo pan.
of course multitracking makes it possible to put an instrument and/or vocal anywhere in the spectrum, but that doesn't make it "work".
Even though the beatles abandoned the actual "live" recording technique, they still marketed and presented the album as a live experience - to go with the movie.
The intended feel of the record is to experience a live beatles performance (even if it wasn't). So it's an anomaly to have a musician's voice separated from his instrument.
Of course perhaps I'm just too sensitive.
With electric instruments and microphones and amplifiers, modern live music often features "a musician's voice separated from his instrument"; it is not anomalous.
Even though this LP features my least favorite Beatles song, I still enjoy the heck out of it - Spectorized or not. In fact, I wish all of the songs on it were recorded "live" on the roof top. It would have been very refreshing to hear a live Beatles recording without the screaming.
As an aside, I get a kick out of the Spector quote on page 5 of this article. I'm by no means a fan of his, but it's the first time I've seen his defense in print. It's actually pretty funny.
Yes, I love that quote. I used it on the Phil Spector profile as well.
Dear all,
We would like to inform you about the following event :
LET IT BE live / The Beatles
by Yael Naim, Mathias Malzieu, Cocoon, Loney Dear, David Donatien, Camille O’Sullivan, Sense of Sound Singers,…
Paris (France), July 4th, Salle Pleyel
For the 40th anniversary of the release of the album Let It Be, David Coulter, who has collaborated with artists like Damon Albarn, Tom Waits and Marianne Faithfull, unites a young generation of European musicians to reinterpret the Beatles' last album.
http://www.citedelamusique.fr/minisites/1007_daysoff/concert/en_let_it_be_live.aspx
I believe Paul made a mistake. He did allow female voices in their records. Yoko sang in The Continuing Story Of Bungalow Bill, and Yoko again along with Patti Harrison in Birthday. His wife Linda provided background vocals for Let It Be.
Yeah, and there was also the female choir in "Walrus" - and howbout those two Apple scruffs that Paul himself invited to sing on "Across The Universe"! He was either being wilfully obtuse, or exaggerating, or he had a terrible memory. (And the amount of dope he smoked would suggest the latter.)
Pretty sure Paul meant a female singing lead
and wasn't there an entire choir on Good Night?
Ooh right, good catch!
LIB is both fantastic and disappointing. Eventhough substandard by usual Beatle standards, the songs are worthy and hold up against anything other artists put out at the same time (hell, for the next 40 years for that matter!). It was a disappointment in that it actually could have been far, far better. The Beatles are openly apathetic on LIB. Also, George's growth as a songwriter could have (had he been allowed to contribute more songs)partly made-up for John's growing indifference, dwindling song contributions and a seeming drop in the quality of his contributions. All Things Must Pass absolutely deserved to have been properly recorded and included on LIB (and NOT in place of, but in addition to, For You Blue and I Me Mine). It is no wonder why George walked out during these sessions and became hesitant to work as a Beatle ever again. What a pity (which reminds us that Harrison's brilliant song Isn't It A Pity was another in a list of George composed tunes rejected for Beatle records by John, Paul and/or George Martin). Thankfully, George recorded these on his own after the group's dissoluion.
It is funny that people think of John towards end as not writing much but he was actually very creative and writing a ton. He just did not want to write for the beatles. Look at his first two solo albums Plastic Ono Band and Imagine, they are full fledged releases. Paul's first solo albums while they are charming and having their bits (and the masterpiece 'Maybe Im Amazed) are bit rough and incomplete.
This is not a Beatle album, is just a Spector work... A Spector album, soloist, taking the tapes and the band's name...
Adding orchestra to a quarter of an album, while not doing anything else of his typical way isn't bad. It's called doing what you're asked.
I think Phil Spector is treated unfairly when it comes to LIB. He had the unenviable task of wading through hours of recordings and make something of it--all with virtually no input for the band. The only sin Spector committed was not being George Martin. Martin is tasteful and understated; Spector (on all his works) is melodramatic and over-the-top. Spector simply delivered a Spector production. Lennon was reportedly happy with it. I have little patience for McCartney's complaints. A bit like crying over spilt milk.
Actually I don't think Spector did wade through that many hours of tapes. Most of the selection and filtering was done by Glyn Johns prior to Spector arriving.
When Spector began work he hit the ground running, completing his work in a matter of days (he needed just seven recording and mixing sessions in March and April 1970), with George Harrison and Allen Klein apparently present for most of the sessions. Ringo Starr even played on one.