I disagree that they are very different cases. Both were recorded approximately a year either side of January '69. Neither had been on the mid-'69 Glyn Johns compilation. I Me Mine was only recorded, apparently, because of someone's decision that it should be on the album because footage of a Twickenham performance of it made it to the film. The same thing, apparently, applied to ATU, a Twickenham performance of which was put in the film. The difference, which you point out, is that I Me Mine was apparently recorded in order that it go onto Let It Be, unlike ATU. That decision was arbitrary though and my view is - and I suspect will always be - that it didn't warrant inclusion in the album and shouldn't have been on any version of Get Back/Let It Be (and ditto for ATU). After all, tonnes of songs were played during the Twickenham sessions and performances of lots of them made it to the film. They weren't recorded for the album. In reality, I suspect including them was an exercise in fitting another John song and another George song on the album. One wonders whether removing Teddy Boy was much to have one less Paul song on there, as much as it was because by that stage Paul had planned for it to be on McCartney.
Wasn't songwriting credit supposedly discussed in that September '69 meeting that was taped and was discussed a fair bit around here (and other parts) not long ago...or am I totally making that up?
Yes, I mentioned that too in my post. BUT since I have not heard the tape, I don't know if it is really true or not. The context of John's proposal to split the partnership may also have been taken out of context, or misunderstood. Or maybe John changed his mind the next day...
I could be thinking about Allan Kozinn's description of the heard (not strictly circulating) content from the September '69 meeting tape, plus what has been reported in a book or two, during a fairly recent Things We Said Today podcast episode...and in so doing I could be imagining the memory.
Yes, I did sort of mean that "in theory" - as some of the later songs don't seem quite so collaborative. But also in as much as it was recorded and released a year or two after the others.
Yes, it could be argued that "Gimme Some Truth" was among the very last released songs from the (in theory) "Lennon/McCartney" songbook (if they were still inclined to assign a Lennon/McCartney song credit to collaborations after 1969). Other songs, like say "Another Day" (Paul) or "Oh My Love" (John), may have been demoed or tried out in 1968-69 by either Paul or John (but not both), so I would not consider them to be true collaborations. Also: "Child Of Nature" from 1968 was on the Esher Tapes (making it theoretically a Lennon/McCartney song). So that song (even with the lyrical changes as it evolved into "Jealous Guy") could have been assigned a joint songwriting credit as well.
I reckon the Let It Be/Get back sessions are the perfect opportunity for The Beatles to set a new trend (new for the mainstream anyway) of encouraging fans to create their own album from all the available recordings. Where the band, Phil Spector, George Martin and Glyn Johns failed, maybe WE can succeed! Give us all the material, and let each of us pay our 60 pence per track on-line, and come up with what we consider to be the definitive album - "Let it Be... Personal."
Well, it's not only that I Me Mine was recorded for the album, as I explained it's also that it was written in the context of the original sessions, and so the style fits more in the late Beatles period. ATU feels like a psychedelic-period track, something out of place.
The false start to Dig A Pony happened in real time and was excised from LIBN. The Danny Boy coda to One After 909 happened in real time and was excised from LIBN. The spoken intro to Two Of Us was added by Phil. "Can you dig it..." was edited onto Dig It by Phil as a bridge into Let It Be. The spoken intro to For You Blue was added by Phil. The "tuning" intro and spoken ending to Get Back were added by Phil to emphase the "live" aspect per the film and differentiate the album version from the single version. As with most things in life, it is more complicated than a simple yes/no...
LIBN - the title is dumb, and the cover is hideous. I played it, was underwhelmed, and filed it away for years and years. I prefer the 1970 Spector version, though I can understand why the Beatles hated it.
I think the legitimacy you attach to I Me Mine is only with hindsight. George brought in several songs to the Get Back sessions that weren't pursued. I Me Mine was one of them. As I recall they spent very little time on it and never gave it a look in at Apple. The difference is that footage of I Me Mine was put into the film, both of George presenting it (in a very tetchy manner) and John and Yoko waltzing to it, and so a year later someone decided that it should be recorded for the LP. It's not like in January '69 they all agreed that it was a track that should be on the LP but they didn't get around to finishing it. John barely paid it any attention and it seems that Ringo and Paul weren't that interested. In that way, I argue that it was arbitrarily included on the LP, not because of merit but to link the LP to the already-edited film. On top of that, I Me Mine also sounds out of place to me - it has no John on it (which isn't unique at all for the latter part of their recording career, especially much of side 2 of Abbey Road, but the Get Back material was at least all tracked with the four of them present - as we know, by January '70 John had quit), it has multiple guitars overdubbed by George, it has overdubbed organ (I assume it's Paul but it may be either of the Georges) and has bombastic and jarring orchestration. While I can accept that ATU has a psychedelic vibe that doesn't go well with the bulk of the Get Back material, in its simplest mixes (Glyn Johns January '70 compilation, LIBN) it has an eathier, more natural sound than I Me Mine does. That is not to say I think ATU is more deserving of being on the LP. As I have said, I don't think either should be there. I suppose I can concede that part of my feeling about I Me Mine probably comes from knowing when it was recorded. That fact colours my view of it no matter how rational I try to be. At the end of the day, I also think it's no more than an average song, especially considering the quality of the material George was working up at that point.
Quite simply revisionism. I think it is ridiculous going back and trying to change the past. Also it spoils the canon of the collection. Another example is the Yellow Submarine Soundtrack and 1.
I hope that Lewisohn can add some insights and details about The Family Way project, that is, if and when he ever completes his next book. I think it might have been the case where John still received half of the songwriting royalties even though only Paul's name appeared. (Is my memory correct here?) I also wonder if John agreed to Paul having only his name appear.
Also, the music from The Family Way is a relatively forgotten musical project, barely making anyone's radar. Yet, it came out smack dab between Revolver and Sgt Pepper.
Some don’t like this version and don’t like the reverb added, especially at the end. It almost sounds like a remix in some places. To me, it’s more “wide open” and immediate/direct. John’s vocals are way up front. I don’t get a sense of “dead sound” that generally dominates Let It Be Naked. I don’t miss the birds, wildlife, or Yoko, either. And love the acoustic guitar. Just try to ignore the politically incorrect blackface. (It was a negative but there was no ill intent.):
Yoko isn't on that track. Lizzie Bravo: backing vocals Gayleen Pease: backing vocals The group continued working on the song until settling on take seven, onto which Lennon again taped his lead vocals. He and Paul McCartney then decided that it needed female harmony vocals to sing ‘Nothing’s gonna change my world’ in the chorus, and so McCartney held an impromptu audition among the girls gathered outside EMI Studios. The girls were Lizzie Bravo, 16, and Gayleen Pease, 17. They were the only Beatles fans ever invited to contribute to a recording session. Cheers, Paul
Maybe I’m wrong, but my memory of Let It Be Naked is that it came out soon after Phil Spector was accused of murder. I always thought Naked was Paul’s way of expunging Spector. Canceling him. So the Beatles wouldn’t be Spector tainted.
Yoko isn't on the original either - but there are wildlife and birds. I got confused - thought you meant the girl backing vocals were Yoko's. I get it now. Cheers, Paul
No, I was confused. I thought I previously read that Yoko was on the original. And I always thought it sounded like her. A high, thin, out of tune voice. But researching this, you are correct regarding the two named female vocalists.
Actually I happen to like the mixes on this album. This needs a remastering without the NR! And I wish they came up with a better cover (but that’s just optics).
