Meet people from all over the World
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: She Loves You Controversy  (Read 7770 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
She Loves You Controversy
« on: February 28, 2006, 01:45:42 PM »

ORIGINALLY POSTED BY RAXO - this deserves it's own thread!

The Sie Liebt Dich Controversy
 
The History of the Lost Beatles Track

She Loves You was recorded at EMI Abbey Road Studio 2 on July 1, 1963. Mono mixing and editing was performed on July 4. Since the original tapes for these sessions no longer exist, all that Mark Lewisohn could say about this session in his book The Beatles Recording Sessions, besides the dates, was:
 
"Precise details of the recording takes no longer exist, but three reels of tape were filled in putting down She Loves You and its B-side I'll Get You..."

On January 29, 1964, while in France for live performances at the Olympia Theater, the Beatles recorded Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand and Sie Liebt Dich for their German fans at a recording session at EMI Pathe Marconi Studios, Paris. The first takes of Can't Buy Me Love were also recorded during those Paris recording sessions that day.



While it is commonly known that the original rhythm (instrumental backing) track from I Want To Hold Your Hand was used to record Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand, it is also commonly believed that the entire recording of Sie Liebt Dich was done completely from scratch. Quoting again from Lewisohn's Recording Sessions:

"First task was to add Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand vocals to the English rhythm track of I Want To Hold Your Hand, mixed down from four-track to two-track. The 'best' versions were takes 5 and 7, with overdubbed handclaps, edited together later.
 
For Sie Liebt Dich, the Beatles recorded a new rhythm track, the 1 July 1963 two-track tape having been scrapped once the mono master was prepared. This was done in 13 takes, onto which they overdubbed, in one take, the vocals in the rhythm left/vocals right pattern of their earlier two-track tapes."


Because the two-track master is missing, She Loves You exists only in mono, as it was never mixed into stereo.

In addition, Allen J. Weiner, in The Beatles Ultimate Recording Guide, agrees:

"Sie Liebt Dich was a completely different recording from She Loves You and included a new instrumental track."



My Revelation *

I've always personally accepted the above descriptions of how Sie Liebt Dich was created. Compare the released versions of She Loves You and Sie Liebt Dich yourself, they do sound very different from each other:

 She Loves You (Swan 45 excerpt)
 Sie Liebt Dich (Odeon 45 excerpt) **

Although She Loves You only exists in mono, there are stereo versions of Sie Liebt Dich on both the Parlophone and Capitol Rarities albums. These versions sound as Lewisohn describes the final Paris recordings above, rhythm track on the left and German vocals on the right.

When listening to this stereo version of Sie Liebt Dich recently, I thought it might be fun to try and make a fake stereo She Loves You by synching the mono She Loves You on one channel with the rhythm track from the stereo Sie Liebt Dich on the other. (Others have attempted to do this as well, one bootleg actually passed off such a synch job as "the missing stereo version of She Loves You".)

However, when I attempted to do this, I immediately noticed that the two tracks are possibly more than coincidentally the same.

Despite the accepted documentation, I have found strong evidence that the Sie Liebt Dich that was recorded on January 29, 1964 in Paris might be new vocals overdubbed onto the July 1, 1963 She Loves You rhythm track, in the very same way they made Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand.

This means that even though the July 1, 1963 two-track master of She Loves You may now be destroyed or missing, I believe it could have still existed on January 29, 1964 for the making of Sie Liebt Dich.



The Beatles in Paris

Keys To The Puzzle

The key to proving that both tracks have identical origins is to hear them both at the same time. However, it is very hard to successfully play back She Loves You and Sie Liebt Dich together and keep them synchronized. I believe this is due to two major factors. These two factors are also very instrumental in understanding why, upon casual listening, the tracks seem to sound so different.

1. Tape Speed
Every release of Sie Liebt Dich is slightly faster than the Parlophone She Loves You. To add to the confusion, the Parlophone release is slightly faster than the American Swan and Capitol releases, which are similar. This makes the difference for American listeners even more acute. (Listen to the comparisons of the Swan She Loves You and the Odeon Sie Liebt Dich above.)
It is possible that the original speed difference is due to differences between the tape decks at Abbey Road where the rhythm track was recorded and those at Pathe Marconi in Paris where Sie Liebt Dich was produced (a difference which was later compounded when the mono mix of She Loves You made its way to America).

A turntable or tape recorder with a vari-speed function or a computer's sound editing program can be used to successfully match the speed of the two versions. When this is done, both versions become perfectly in tune musically with each other. This is an important fact. If they were totally separate recordings, played in the same key but at slightly different tempos, when corrected to match speeds, their musical keys would not match. But this is not the case.

The speed differential between the original Parlophone mix and the German mix may also be at least partially intentional, keep reading.

2. Tape Edits in Mono Mix
We can hear that the mono mix of She Loves You is very heavily edited. Sie Liebt Dich does not appear to be. Listen to this sound clip which contains three examples of edits in She Loves You from the version on the Past Masters 1 CD:

 She Loves You (mono mix tape edits) **

The first edit in the above soundclip is slightly hard to hear, it takes place in the middle of the guitar after "you know you should be glad", this is approximately 1:15 into the song. The next two are much easier to hear, right before "pride can hurt you too" at 1:22 into the song, and then again right before "because she loves you" at 1:29 into the song.
These edits, and others, are in every release of She Loves You but they are easiest to hear on the Past Masters CD. Steps were taken during the mastering of earlier 45 and LP versions to hide the edits somewhat, this seems not to have been done when Past Masters was released.

The edits throw any synchonization attempts off, as they were done by hand and each physical tape edit possibly includes a tiny bit more of each recording than it should, or a tiny bit less. These slight editing mistakes are not big enough to notice upon casual listening, but are big enough to cause synch attempts to seem to drift in and out of synchronization as the edited version first includes tiny snippets of the original recording where it shouldn't, and then loses tiny bits later that should be there, when compared to the seemingly unedited Sie Liebt Dich.


A Controversial Theory

But why is the mono mix of She Loves You so highly edited, much more than any other early Beatles release? I have a theory as to why this is.

It is documented that at the time She Loves You was recorded, the Beatles were recording on a two-track tape machine. That means the song would have been recorded with the rhythm track on one channel and the voices on the other.

 We also know that it took much time, especially in the early years, for George to work out his lead guitar parts, although once he worked out the part, he played very well. This is reason to believe that George's guitar might have been recorded separately from the rhythm track which was done first.



In the two-track days, for that to be accomplished, since both tracks were already taken up, one for the rhythm track and the other for the vocals, it would have been necessary to "mix down" both of these tracks to one track of a new tape, thereby opening up a new free track.

It's possible George Martin opted not to do this for two main reasons. First, a "mix-down" step would mean an additional tape generation, meaning the introduction of a lot of tape noise (hiss). Also, it meant relenquishing the ability to re-mix. Once mixed-down, the levels of the vocals to the rhythm track would be forever set and unchangeable, and it would be impossible, for example, to change something in the vocal without affecting the rhythm track.

Instead, it's possible to believe that George's lead guitar track was simply recorded on a separate tape, to be played back in synch with first two-track tape when making the mix. There is evidence they had done something similar to this earlier, on a smaller scale, with things like John's harmonica on From Me To You and Thank You Girl, where we know the harmonica is not part of the main rhythm track, because of tape evidence of the actual edit pieces, and differences in the mono and stereo mixes of the song.

The fact that George's guitar had to be synched with the main tape when making the mono mix could explain why the mono mix is so heavily edited. It was way too difficult to get it all perfectly synchronized in one take, so they edited together all of the best attempts.

In addition, this perhaps explains why there is no stereo mix of She Loves You, because it would have been too hard to do, and there's no way they could do a stereo mix that sounded exactly like the mono one. There is documented evidence that George Martin did something like this again later, issuing I Am The Walrus in fake stereo rather than attempt a true-stereo mix because an effect created during the mono mix (the King Lear voice-over) could not be recreated in the same way.

I admit I have no proof that there was a separate George guitar track, it is only a theory. At the very least, upon the evidence of all the tape edits in the mono mix, the She Loves You master tapes must have been comprised of several separately recorded components which were assembled for the mono mix. This sheds some light on many of the lingering questions in the making of She Loves You and Sie Liebt Dich mystery.


Norman Smith, engineer for both She Loves You sessions


Putting It All Together

It's important to remember that all of the documenation we have on the making of both She Loves You and Sie Liebt Dich is shaky, at best. Taking a look again at the quote from Lewisohn:

"For Sie Liebt Dich, the Beatles recorded a new rhythm track, the 1 July 1963 two-track tape having been scrapped once the mono master was prepared. This was done in 13 takes, onto which they overdubbed, in one take, the vocals in the rhythm left/vocals right pattern of their earlier two-track tapes."

We know at least part of that account is wrong, the vocal overdubs were not accomplished in one take, as this outtake snippet from Anthology proves:


 Sie Liebt Dich (outtake from Anthology) **


I think it is reasonable to believe that the thirteen takes that Lewisohn describes it took to re-record the Sie Liebt Dich rhythm track could instead have been thirteen takes to successfully reconstruct the rhythm track for Sie Liebt Dich from the components of the original She Loves You master tapes. This process would have been very laborious, and could have easily taken thirteen tries, the very reason a stereo mix was abandoned originally.

At the same time, is it reasonable to believe it would have taken the Beatles thriteen takes to re-record the rhythm track for a song they already knew very well by this point?

If indeed some recombining of the master tapes was involved in recreating the She Loves You rhythm track, this could be the very cause of the speed differences between the two releases. It may have been necessary for them to slightly speed up the She Loves You two-track master in Paris as they were making the mix, in an attempt to make the various tape components match better.


Deciding For Yourself

Despite the difficulty due to the factors described above, it is still possible to synchronize She Loves You and Sie Liebt Dich enough to demonstrate the phenomenon of how alike they sound. When you listen to them synchronized, it sounds as if the lead guitar and bass guitar parts are identical throughout. In addition, the drum part also sounds like it is identical in several unique passages.
To help you explore the striking similarities between She Loves You and Sie Liebt Dich, I have prepared the four clips below. Each is the same segment of both songs, the Parlophone mono mix of She Loves You on the left and the instrumental track from the stereo mix of Sie Liebt Dich from the Parlophone Rarities LP on the right, with Sie Liebt Dich slightly slowed down (approximately 2%) to match the speeds, and synchronized to line up as close as possible.


 She Loves You/Sie Liebt Dich Comparison (Clip 1)
 She Loves You/Sie Liebt Dich Comparison (Clip 2)
 She Loves You/Sie Liebt Dich Comparison (Clip 3)
 She Loves You/Sie Liebt Dich Comparison (Clip 4) **


Besides being generally alike, here are some specific things to look for in the above clips:

1. The de-emphasized drum beat after the second "Yeah Yeah Yeah".
The lead guitar has an identical note-doubling in the phrase right before the vocal.
2. The unique drum break before "and you know..."
3. Extra notes in bass line under "but now she said she knows..."
4. The lead guitar phrases, the first of which starts sloppily.
When listening to these examples, try to focus on one instrument at a time. Listening to these soundclips in headphones makes it easier to focus on each instrumental element.

Also, listen for what is alike, rather than what is missing from one or other, as missing sounds can easily be explained by being "buried" in their respective mixes by other sounds or differences in the mixing and mastering processes.

After hearing the two versions of the song synchronized, and considering the details described above, it's my opinion that the two recordings, She Loves You and Sie Liebt Dich, were made using the same instrumental performance. However, we may never know the answer for sure. Many of the people involved are no longer with us, and it was years ago. Perhaps if more of the Sie Liebt Dich recording session (a bit of which is included above) is ever released from the EMI vaults, we may know if they really did record a new live rhythm track for Sie Liebt Dich that day in Paris in 1964. Until then, we'll just have to depend on our own ears.

And remember, it was George Martin who said "All you need is ears". ***


* Not mine but author's ...
** Audio links
*** Not mine but I agree ...



From here: http://www.shelovesyou.info/slyandsld.html

Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2006, 01:51:07 PM »

I have yet to listen to the sample on: http://www.shelovesyou.info/slyandsld.html but the real test to see if the two backing tracks are the same is whether they "phase" when synchronised - I'll let you know!

Thanks for the original post though Raxo - nice find! :)
Logged

zipp

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1625
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2006, 08:56:23 PM »

Yes, thanks Raxo.
The audio excerpts seem convincing.
Another Lewisohn myth bites the dust.
Logged

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2006, 08:27:16 AM »

I always thought it quite unbelievable that the original She Loves You tape was scrapped. This theory could very well be true. The Beatles didn't feel like recording the German versions at all, in fact they didn't show up at the recording studio. After he waited a long time, George Martin went to get The Beatles, who were playing cards in their hotelroom. There was not very much time left to do the whole thing all over again. But that's just another theory. ;D
Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2006, 12:22:50 PM »

The thing I have always noticed about the edits in She Loves You is the fact that the cymbal sound appears to change - as if Ringo was hitting harder in some edits - and the overal track volume dips and rises depending on the specific edit. This always suggested to me that the finished master tape was assembled from several performances, as each edit had a slightly different feel - as with any live performance, which is effectively what their early recordings were.

However, this does not fit in with this new theory of it being edit pieces due to synchronisation problems.
Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2006, 12:23:30 PM »

By the way, I still haven't listened to these audio exerpts!!
Logged

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #6 on: March 01, 2006, 03:09:27 PM »

Quote from: zipp
Yes, thanks Raxo.
The audio excerpts seem convincing.
Another Lewisohn myth bites the dust.

I've done nothing, zipp, believe me! Hahaha  :P ;D

After all, I still think Mark's one of the people who knows the most about them, but we must listen to other people too ... and maybe we discover new things and curiosities from time to time ... maybe  ??) ... (tho there's a lot of nonsense out there too  :-/ , as we all know quite well  :D )

Thanks, The End, for the new thread ... I used to try not to begin new ones if there's already one about the same subject or about the same song  ::) ... but I admit that there are times when a new thread helps people to read certain post and not to be hidden by the tons of threads we've got on these forums ... so thanks ... again ...  :)
Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2006, 02:00:13 AM »

Just listened to the clips (finally!)... HE'S RIGHT!!! The German backing IS the same as the regular version!

Did they leave the master tape in the Marconi studios in Paris by mistake?!!!

Actually this reminds me of something I discovered for myself many years ago (although it is VERY much common knowledge now!) - that the World Wild Life version of Across The Universe has the same vocals and acoustic guitar as the Let It Be version. In the 'old' days it was always asumed that they were different versions. But when, out of curiosity,  I mixed the two versions together I noticed the 'phasing' effect that you only get when two audio signals are the same!

Unfortunately, I couldn't tell anyone this - I was only about 14 years old and didn't know any other Beatle fans as fanatical as me!! Plus this was back in days before the internet!!!

Years later, it was nice finding out that I was right though when I read about the track in Mark Lewisohn's 'Sessions' book!!  
Logged

adamzero

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1410
  • "The dude abides."
    • Phoebe Claire Publishing, LLC
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #8 on: March 03, 2006, 03:19:39 AM »

That German backing version is weird, sped up, sounds almost proto-punk.
Logged

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #9 on: March 03, 2006, 09:01:47 AM »

Quote from: The_End
Did they leave the master tape in the Marconi studios in Paris by mistake?!!!
 

The Germans took it.
Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #10 on: March 03, 2006, 12:34:09 PM »

Quote from: Bobber

The Germans took it.

Yeah, any excuse to invade Paris!! ;)
Logged

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2006, 05:32:14 PM »

Quote from: zipp
Yes, thanks Raxo.
The audio excerpts seem convincing.
Another Lewisohn myth bites the dust.



Catching Up With Mark Lewisohn


In the world of the Beatles, author Mark Lewisohn is renowned for his meticulous research and integrity. His word is his bond. Perhaps, Mark became the envy of Beatles fans the world over when, in 1987, he was commissioned by EMI to listen to all of the Beatles original session tapes and catalogue his findings in the heralded book, The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions. Mark has been engaged as a consultant on scores of official projects by EMI, MPL and Apple for almost 25 years.

Now, Mark is embarking on his most ambitious project, a mammoth three volume biography of the Beatles that will conclude in 2016.

Mark graciously took the time to answer a few questions. Our interview, via e-mail, took place Thursday, January 27, 2005.

Brad Howard (BH): Congratulations on your multiple book deal. Could you tell our readers what they can expect in these new books?

Mark Lewisohn (ML): I'm writing a biography of the Beatles which, if I get it right and achieve my aims - and I've set the bar high - could become, well, a lasting work. It's a change of direction for me in that my previous Beatles books were 'reference' in nature, whereas this will be a pure biography in structure and appearance.

I'm going to relate the Beatles history comprehensively and accurately and richly and with, I hope, a broad level of understanding. It merits three volumes to do it full justice. I'd been planning to write a single biography of the year 1963 anyway, with perhaps other periods to follow, and then I decided to bite off the lot. This is virgin territory, though - there's never been such an extensive biography of a pop/rock band or artist, but the Beatles always were about doing things first, and in fact they still are: look how many artists have copied the Anthology TV series, albums and book.

So here I am with a three-volume commission to write an inclusive, contextual and authoritative biographical history of the band that changed the world. And history is exactly what it is now - it's half a century since John Lennon started it all off, and there are many ways now in which the 1950s seem positively prehistoric, let alone the period before that.

I'll be producing a series of books the publishers firmly believe could outlive us all - me included - and it's going to monopolise my own life for the next twelve years while I research and write them. I had to think long and hard before taking the leap - do I really want to be living and sleeping this for the next dozen years? But I've assured them I'll deliver a biggie and now I have to meet that promise. So far, one year into the job, I'm still enjoying every minute of it. The first of three large volumes will be out in 2008, and this will take the reader up to the end of 1963. The second volume will pick up from there and be out in 2012, the third in 2016.

BH: Has there been any reaction from the surviving Beatles, Olivia Harrison, Yoko Ono, or Apple?

ML: I need to be guarded in my answer here because this is a very long project that's still in its earliest days. Beneficial situations can turn around, and vice-versa, and I won't jeopardise anything. I must stress, though, that this is not an official series. Apple has not officially endorsed an outside project for as long as I can remember, and they haven't asked to come on board. These books must be seen to be neutral. I have no agenda, I just want to research and relate the Beatles' history, and the history of everything that was going on around them - they didn't exist in a vacuum - and to use my skills as a writer to ensure it rises from every page. It's a story so fantastic that no embroidery or deception is required, and nor would I give it any. It'll be told straight, with no 'side' whatever.

I'd like to think they'll all know I'm worthy of the task - they've been employing my knowledge for long enough - and better perhaps that someone with proven passion is doing it rather than somebody unknown to them or whose work is shoddy, which really would give them something to worry about. A friend recently pointed out to me that by the time the trilogy is completed, in 2016, I'll have been researching the Beatles, professionally, for almost 40 years. That should convince anyone where my heart has always been. And these books could be very useful to the Beatles, commercially, because it is anticipated that they may open up a whole new future audience, reaching people who've never bought a Beatles record . . . at least not yet.

I'm very mindful of the responsibility: how the Beatles story goes down in these books could shape how they're remembered far into the future, when everyone involved has gone. Getting it right - or as accurate as any human can ever make something - is absolutely paramount, for all parties.

BH: In the July 1999 issue of The World Beatles Forum, you stated, "The fact that we've had Beatles CDs in our collections now for 12 years and we still don't have Hollywood Bowl is probably no oversight." Given the fact that Beatles fans never thought that they would see the Beatles "capitolize" on the American configurations and mixes, do you think that there is a better chance today that we will see the Hollywood Bowl album released on CD in the near future?

ML: It would be foolish to say that it will never happen because a) while I've a long relationship with Apple and EMI they certainly don't phone to tell me all their future plans, not unless they want me to be involved in them, and b) anything is possible. I would simply reiterate my point, adding now six years to the total, that it's not likely to be an oversight that an album issued on vinyl and tape 28 years ago, in 1977, has not yet been issued on a shiny silver disc. As to whether that situation will ever change, your guess is as good as mine.

BH: With the innovation of vastly improved sound reproduction over the past few years, and the success of the new Capitol box set, is it possible that EMI and Apple will attempt a British box set of the first four albums in stereo (and maybe the others in mono)?

ML: Again, I really don't know, and I couldn't comment on their business even if I did. All the same, it's clear that for many years now there has been a general clamour for a substantial revisiting of the original Beatles CD catalogue. The quality of the key 13 Beatles albums in the racks at the moment is well below that of any other major act, in terms of artwork and sonic quality, and this is a pity because it is not enhancing their reputation and it's losing them substantial income. Everyone would benefit from a significant reissue programme, Beatles and buyers alike.

BH: When you originally listened to the John Lennon archives for what was to eventually become the John Lennon Anthology CD set, were there plans to write and publish a book based upon what you heard, similar to your EMI book?

ML: There was no such intention. I was certainly planning to write something extensive along those lines in the CD book but, of course, after I'd been framed for a misdemeanour not of my making, I departed the project. As for whether such a book will ever be written, that's for Yoko to decide. I do think the story of John's recording sessions, done like the Beatles recording sessions book, could only emphasise what a tremendous artist he was. But it would be for someone else to write: I'm busy for the next twelve years!

BH: Lately, there has been a rash of so-called new Beatles discoveries (in most cases, rediscoveries). There was the suitcase of recordings in Australia, the elderly man from Suffolk with a supposed 18-song rehearsal tape, and most recently, there is a collector who asserts that he has a claim to a previously unheard Lennon-McCartney composition, Mississippi River Born, that he sold to either Yoko Ono or EMI. Other than some of the "Get Back" tapes that were confiscated a few years ago, have there been any new legitimate Beatles audio or video discoveries since the release of the Anthology CDs?

ML: You say 'lately' but it's my impression that so-called 'new discoveries' have been happening fairly regularly since the 1970s - and while one is always excited at the prospect of a genuinely important new find they usually turn out to be disappointing. The so- called suitcase from Australia seemed to me to be a hoax from the start and I tried telling this to the journalist from The Times [London] who was bothering me on and off for a day trying to make his breaking story into something special. He wasn't going to let the truth get in the way of a good headline - and that was The Times, of all papers. What an indictment of the world we live in. However, I'm delighted - as I'm sure all fans and students are - that audio and visual items assumed lost do continue to turn up from time to time, and I would add photos and documents to that category. For me, a fascinating, previously unseen photograph or letter or historical document turning up is always exciting.

BH: You have written several books about the Beatles and your 1988 landmark volume, The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions, is still in high demand, today. Is there any plan for EMI to publish a slightly revised version (with the Anthology additions) of this popular book? It would certainly be a top seller.

ML: I think that is unlikely to happen, for the simple reason that EMI can no longer produce Beatles-related projects without asking Apple's approval, and this was an EMI-authorised book, not an Apple- authorised book. Had it been so, then I expect Apple would have taken exception to some of the things I wrote, or people said, possibly with sound reason. I'm actually much more interested in republishing The Complete Beatles Chronicle, improving its format and embracing all the new information that has come to light since it was first published in 1992. Again though, now that I'm fully engaged on the biographical trilogy, that will have to wait, even if the publishers were to break with tradition and ask me.

Incidentally, I'm not even sure if EMI are aware that Hamlyn recently licensed the reprint of Recording Sessions that brought it back into the stores for the first time in more than a dozen years. I certainly didn't know it had been done until people said they'd seen it on sale. And I hate the cover. Hamlyn's corporate nonsense has been dogging me for years, and they never bother to invite the involvement of the person who created the work.

BH: Here is a question from Markus in UK. Although you have listened to all of the Beatles' original session tapes, John C. Winn, the author of two books, Way Beyond Compare: The Beatles' Recorded Legacy, 1957-1965 and That Magic Feeling: The Beatles' Recorded Legacy, 1966-1970, has questioned some of your findings concerning takes and variations of some of The Beatles recordings. Can you comment on these criticisms?

ML: Without getting into specifics here I'd like to say that it's been well established for many years that there are errors in the Recording Sessions book. None of them intentional, of course, but simply errors of fact or interpretation. I'm not surprised: it had a very rigid design already in place before they found a writer and I wanted much more time to do the job properly than I was given. It was done in a terrible rush to meet an unnecessary deadline, and corners were cut. I'm proud of it of course, but it could have been done so much better and more precisely. What's so pleasing is that the book helped pave the way for the numerous more studied, very well- informed analyses of Beatles recordings that have followed in the last 15 years, such as those Markus mentions, John C Winn's books, both of which I think are superb. There are several Beatles reference authors who deserve full respect.

BH: You wrote the brief liner notes for The Capitol Albums Vol. 1. How did you become involved in this project?

ML: The project was already underway when Apple called me in. It's always handy then to be in a position to have creative input. I pushed for both the mono and stereo mixes to be issued together, and was thankful when that was finally agreed. Those Capitol albums were very short, 25-27 minutes apiece, and all the parties - Capitol, EMI, Apple, especially the Beatles themselves - would have been sharply criticised for short-changing the public if they'd issued under two hours of music across four discs. The Beatles were never about that, they were a giving group. My most obvious contribution, though, was the essay. I wouldn't call it a 'liner note' because it clearly doesn't fulfil that function. I just wrote a short introduction, at Neil Aspinall's request, to explain what the box was about, making it clear why these albums were different from the CDs available since 1987. It's what Derek Taylor would have done if he was still with us . . . and how we all wish he was. I'd be showing him all the things I'm finding out for the biographies and he'd be loving it.

BH: Did you get to hear the albums before they were released on CD?

ML: No, they didn't ask me and I didn't need to. Along with several other people I simply urged for the CDs to be produced from the original Capitol LP masters, whatever one's opinion of them, rather than the current 'best' mixes of the required songs. To be authentic, to be true to the original sounds, was surely what the project was all about.

BH: Will you be part of Vol. 2?

ML: I'd be happy to be. However, I also understand that the collector buyers, who must constitute a higher than usual proportion of the sales here, might wish for the booklet to take a different approach. Whether Apple would be comfortable with that I really don't know.

BH: Do you know what albums will be next?

ML: I don't know.

BH: Apple and the Beatles are slowly restoring and releasing various albums and videos. The Beatles gave us the wondrous Yellow Submarine songtrack album and its breathtaking film. They released the Let It Be...Naked album a couple of years ago, but the film is still not available. Can you comment on its delay? Has it been delayed?

ML: The word 'delay' suggests that Apple announced a release date and then postponed it, which I don't believe is the case. All I know, and it's really no secret, is that they are continuing to do important work on the project. When it's ready, it'll come out. Hurrying could mean compromise so I'm certainly not for hurrying them.

BH: When Let It Be is finally released to the public, will it still be the same as its original theatrical release or will certain scenes be edited out?

ML: I don't know.

BH: Other than the projects mentioned previously, are EMI or Apple planning further Beatles projects?

ML: Apart from Cirque du Soleil, you mean? Not that I'm aware of but, as I've said, there's no reason why they should keep me abreast of their plans.

BH: You've written non-Beatles related books. Are there others in the works?

ML: No - I've cleared my desk of all other work until 2016 in order to concentrate fully on the three Beatles biographies. I've enjoyed focusing on other subjects for the past ten years and broadening my writing experience but now it's time to return full-time to Beatles research, with no distractions. I'm 46, I'll be close to 60 when it's all over, if I don't start now I won't get it done.
....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Appeal: In piecing together the complete history of the Beatles and their times, Mark Lewisohn would be pleased if any fellow collectors are prepared to share information or material which is not generally known about. He doesn't want records or CDs but principally letters, documents and images, anything that sheds light, no matter how small or insignificant it might seem. All contributions will be acknowledged in the appropriate volume(s) of the series. Please e- mail via: jpage3@hotmail.co.uk


http://abbeyrd.best.vwh.net/lewisohn.html
Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2006, 07:16:17 PM »

This from September 7th, 2005

Quote from: The_End
Here's some fairly exclusive info that I gleaned from my trip to Liverpool regarding Allan Williams and Mark Lewisohn....

* Allan Williams' has just sold the film rights to his book "The Who Gave The Beatles Away"! This is a TOP book by the way!

* Mark Lewisohn has been commissioned to write a series of incredibly in-depth books about the Beatles and their impact on society and the Sixties. These are expected to be MIGHTY tomes and the first is due out in 2008 with the second to follow some FOUR years later! Mark has already expressed some doubt that these deadlines will actually be met and has asked for an extension!!
Logged

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2006, 07:28:19 PM »

Deja vu, then ...  ;D ... credits to The End
Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2006, 07:32:13 PM »

Thank you! ;D  *bows*
Logged

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2006, 07:35:50 PM »

Quote from: The_End
Thank you! ;D  *bows*

Oh, please  :B ... we're off-toppic ... 'cos where's the controversy now? LOL!!!
Logged

The End

  • That Means a Lot
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8216
  • Turn off your mind, relax and float down stream...
    • The End
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2006, 07:39:36 PM »

Ooops, yeah... sorry! :(
Logged

raxo

  • Sun King
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10680
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2006, 07:42:17 PM »

Logged

Bobber

  • Guest
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #18 on: March 28, 2006, 08:40:08 PM »

An anynomous Beatlesfan managed to synchronise two versions of She Loves You into a new stereo remix. One is the version from the Beatles 1962-1966 (the red album), the other one is from Rarities. This fan made three versions, downloadable here: http://s5.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2L56XVVBSL6RH0EQW6G74KN7TQ

-with regards to the Dutch beatlesfanclub.nl-
Logged

Kate

  • A Thousand Pages
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 1234
  • Don't take it from the top
Re: She Loves You Controversy
« Reply #19 on: March 29, 2006, 06:46:37 AM »

funny - thanks Bobber
 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
 

Page created in 1.588 seconds with 72 queries.