Let It Be vs LiB Naked
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: General Music Discussions
Forum Description: Discuss and create polls about all types of music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=96561
Printed Date: May 17 2025 at 00:49
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Let It Be vs LiB Naked
Posted By: smartpatrol
Subject: Let It Be vs LiB Naked
Date Posted: January 04 2014 at 01:23
|
Although the Let It Be sessions/film were an attempt to return to a simpler, rawer style after their psychedelic exploits in sound that they embarked on in the mid-late sixties, the Let It Be album was shelved after severe tension between the band mates, who had all grown completely tired of the project, and wouldn't be produced until a year later, by Phil Spector, famous for his wall of sound technique, who gave the songs new, lavish arrangements, featuring choirs and strings, effectively achieving the opposite of what the project was intended to do. In 2002, Paul McCartney McCartney recruited engineers Paul Hicks, Guy Massey and Allan Rouse to remix the album, stripping it of most of Phil's work, and instead make it how it was originally intended. So, which version do you enjoy best? Personally I really hate the original's production; frankly it sounds like sh*t. Naked is a great album, really gives the songs the great sound they deserved. TL;DR: or ------------- http://bit.ly/1kqTR8y" rel="nofollow">  The greatest record label of all time! |
Replies:
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: January 04 2014 at 01:28
|
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=93360&KW=Let+It+Be" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=93360&KW=Let+It+Be
...? ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: smartpatrol
Date Posted: January 04 2014 at 01:31
|
oh sorry! Forgot I made that! Delete pls
------------- http://bit.ly/1kqTR8y" rel="nofollow"> The greatest record label of all time! |