Across The Universe

beatlemaniac · Post by **beatlemaniac** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 12:50 pm

I've heard three different versions of this song.The original version was from the late 60s and part of a wildlife project of some sort.It is my favourite version.The sound of birds singing and flapping their wings is heard just before the song begins.A female vocalist(possibly Yoko)is heard singing the verse"Nothing's gonna change my world"with John.We also can hear the flapping of a bird's wings at the end of the song.The version from the Let It Be album is quite different.The beat is slower and I find it to sound kind of sad.Then we have the version from the recently released Let It Be...Naked album,which sounds a little more like the original,but without the nature sound effects.David Bowie even did his own version of the song on his 1975 album Young Americans.I guess that makes four different versions of Across The Universe.

apollo11 · Post by **apollo11** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:01 pm

Another version is on The Beatles Anthology 2, the last song on the 2nd cd. It may be the raw master of the one that was used on the Let It Be album. The Anthology version has a breathtaking intro---very uncluttered guitar and singing at the start. Overall, I think this is the best version, with the clearest instrumentation, vocals & production of all the versions.

I love the one with the birds, too. Two fans who were outside the studio were asked to come in to sing backing vocals on the one you mention.

emswife · Post by **emswife** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:31 pm

Have either of you heard the "Let IT Be-Naked" version? There are no birds flapping, no groupies from outside, no Yoko... it is the song as was recorded by the lads with Lennon on vocals.

The effects were all added by Phil Spector after he was given the tapes to try and make what Capitol deemed a "marketable" profit. That is why it was necessary for paul to ask George Martin if he would produce Abbey Road. Martin had been left comletely out of the "Let It Be" experience which was produced by Glyn Johns. Martin agreed only after getting the "lads" agreement that the record would be produced the way he wanted it done... not Paul, not Yoko, not anyone but George Martin.

I much prefer the "Naked" version of all the songs, especially "The Long and Winding Road". It is a real classic without all the strings etc that are associated with the Spector "wall of sound".

loendmaestro · Post by **loendmaestro** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:59 pm

The best thing about "The Long & Winding Road" on Let It Be Naked is that Paul's basslines are really audible now w/o all the Spector stuff.

rumbush · Post by **rumbush** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 9:00 am

Of course it is John who plays bass on "The Long and Winding Road," on all versions recorded during the Get Back sessions. He plays that Fender VI that got passed around between the guys.
Notably, the version on "...Naked" is a different "take" than the one on the original Let It Be LP (why that version was chosen for the original release is questionable due to the numerous errors and general sloppiness of John's bass playing - one reason Phil Spector lavishly overdubbed the thing IMHO). I think I have most or all of the takes of "The Long and Winding Road" that were recorded in the Apple basement during the last part of January '69 and they're pretty similar, if memory serves (haven't pulled them out in a while).

loendmaestro · Post by **loendmaestro** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:33 am

Thanks for the correction J.
Whether it was Paul or John, it was nice to hear the bassline "unearthed" as it were...

I do like Let It Be Naked, but I grew up listening to Let It Be in it's original Spector form & that's the one I'm accustomed to hearing.

rumbush · Post by **rumbush** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 11:08 am

Chris, I'm with you! Although the Spectorization is omnipresent and overdone in my opinion, especially on TLAWR, I prefer the original release too. One thing I will say is that the vocals sound much clearer, better, and more alive on the new mix. The One After 909 is all muddy and messed up and I Me Mine sounded better as a huge production (let's face it-- it was anyway, only 3 Beatles play all those instruments on that song!). I hate the fade-outs on every song and I miss the little interjections and speech that were edited into the original record. I think the best re-issue sound yet is on the Yellow Submarine Songtrack - all those tracks pretty much are perfectly redone.

loendmaestro · Post by **loendmaestro** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 12:37 pm

Yes indeed - it's ridiculous that the Yellow Submarine Songtrack is the only remastered Beatles title there is. I mean what are they waiting for? If the Dylan catalog has finally been remastered it's high time the Fab 4's was as well!

emswife · Post by **emswife** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:35 pm

Why do remasters of crummy masters to start with? Remember that at the time of the original recording, there was only a 4 track machine at EMI. The "lads" would fill up the 4 tracks, then mix it down to one and start over. Unless there has been some unannounced miracle in technology, I don't know if you could ever separate the tracks back to the "original as they were laid down" tracks.

Yellow Submarine is a different matter as by the time it was made, EMik had vastly improved it's baords and I believe had even upgraded to 16 track technology. And remember, the soundtrack was probably made better in post production as the movie industry was gaining by leaps and bounds.

Just my two cents worth...

apollo11 · Post by **apollo11** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:32 pm

This is a long one, sometimes rambling, so I apologize up front.

In a lot of ways, I think the Yellow Submarine remasters changed the sounds of many of the original songs, and not for the better. The remastering altered the way the songs were intended by the Beatles & George Martin.

Check out the song Sgt. Pepper on Yellow Submarine; the original recording starts off with "It was twenty years ago today, in the right speaker. It is as if McCartney is the emcee, and is off to the side of the stage---when he introduces the band, they are at stage-left as they begin with “We're Sgt Pepper's Lonely...." and then they effortlessly get to center stage, before McCartney wraps it up as the emcee again, far off to the right, to introduce Billy Sheers. Now put on the newly remastered edition of the song---the new producers abandon this emcee approach and blend the vocals more centrally in the speakers. The change completely ruins the feeling that was intended in the original, as if the new producers had no idea what the Beatles were trying to do. And talk about ruining a pioneering stereo venture. They’ve monofied it in many ways!

Next listen to Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds. McCartney's bass, one of the most supremely melodic bass lines in music history, is very muddy; it doesn't jump out and lead the song like it does in the original recording.

All You Need Is Love is so altered in its sound that they made it almost hollow. Listen to the original and then the remaster, and you'll see what I mean. Even Yellow Submarine, when Lennon comes in to echo Ringo (the sky of blue bit), the new one has him come in earlier---it is a little clumsy and out of time, which is why they probably lowered it in the original mix of the song.

When I’m 64 has the vocals to the left in the original. The clarinets, etc, are in their full glory at the far right, along with the backing vocals. Bass is center and prominent. Backing vocals are at right.

In the remix, the vocals are dead center. Clarinets are right/center. Backing vocals are mixed in the center. Why would the current engineers & producers want to change it? Do you think Lennon/McCartney/Martin etc, couldn’t have mixed it this way if they wanted to? They didn’t want to. They were experimenting with stereo and this is the way they wanted the records to sound. Most of the songs I mention are part of the original Sgt. Pepper album, which is considered the greatest album ever made. They should not be messed with, except to perhaps clean up cracks and imperfections, not alter the way the songs were intended to sound. The Beatles spent almost 600 hours recording the album, and created a masterpiece----why have somebody come in who had nothing to do with the original sessions, and ruin these historic recordings.

To clean up a lot of the tracks, which I think was unnecessary in most cases, they've sometimes given them a hollow-type atmosphere, which has almost masked the analog sound, bringing them more towards a digital feel. This is a mistake, IMO, as the digital sound is cooler and more distant than analog.

George Martin could well be the greatest producer in pop/rock history. Compare the early Beatles to the Stones of the mid-sixties. The Stones production was awful in many cases. A great producer makes the recordings timeless. Compare the early Stones to the early Beatles---the Stones recordings sound ancient. They are without depth and lack bass. Listen to groups like the Doors or Beach Boys. Like the Beatles, the production was always great with these bands. The recordings are still crisp and bright today---groups like these don’t need remastering; the sounds were so good to begin with.

If albums were remastered to repair imperfections such as hiss, scratches, pops, etc., I don’t have a problem with that. I just don’t like how some hotshot young producer can think he can do something better with the master tapes of yesterday by changing the construction of a song. There is a reason these songs and albums are classics. Let’s keep them classic by not altering them away from the way they were intended.

loendmaestro · Post by **loendmaestro** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:31 pm

There's a difference between remixing & remastering.
I in no way wish the tracks/albums to be altered in any way to deviate from the classic status that they have rightfully attained. Simply to have them cleaned up & reMASTERED where at least the volume of the CD would be comparable to "modern" CDs is all I'm asking.
Maybe I'm being selfish, but I am a mix CD geek & I'd just like them simply freshened up instead of direct transfers from the old album masters.

I totally agree with you about the old Stones CDs...the production on those old ABKCO CDs is horrific. All I'm saying is that while Sir George, Macca & Ringo are still alive THEY need to sit down & make sure that they're done right, before the "young hotshot producer" you refer to is given free reign because there is no other choice. Good lord, Yoko is pawning off all of John's old shirts & Nike got to use "Revolution" for a commercial for christ's sake! Appreciate & respect the finest music ever made before the legacy is tarnished. (Like Pete Townsend has done with the Who's back catalog...)

I worked for a major record label for 10 years, & trust me EMI is just waiting to cash in. It's really just a question of when. In this era of major label mergers EMI & WEA are the last two stand alone label groups & it's only a matter of time before they are one.

And don't you know that the rights to the Beatles catalog will be a major negotiating point...

nattiep · Post by **nattiep** » Thu May 05, 2005 2:31 am

There are 6 versions of the song that I know of. 4 of the Beatles, one of Bowie, and Roger Waters covered it. Oh, it was terrible! Roger sounds awful!

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu May 05, 2005 2:53 am

Add another: Fiona Apple's.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu May 05, 2005 2:55 am

And, Rufus Wainwright's. The orchestration on Rufus' is kinda nice.

helterskelter · Post by **helterskelter** » Thu May 05, 2005 6:05 am

Paul McCartney now admits that he likes the Naked version better, without all the Spector orchestration stuff, he has always said the liked the original of The Long And Winding Road better.