The version released on Swan records (Phila. U.S.A. label 1963) sounds exactly like this and also the version in "A Hard Days Night". This must have been before the tampering by Capitol.
Just to keep you kiddies up to date...the week BEFORE "I want to hold your hand" was #1 on WABC (the flagship AM radio station in NYC) "Louie Louie"/Kingsmen was #1 followed by The Singing Nun at #2. Need I say more as to why we went crazy over them.
It sounds like a homemade job. The US 'She loves You' stereo mix did have extra reverb added, but this is nott it. This is slowed down, and sounds nothing like She Loves You on Beatles Second Album. From the EQ changes (that were very well masked in the US Stereo Version), it sounds like She Loves You from The Beatles In Mono with extra reverb added to that.
@morninggloryseed Congratulations! In as much as this matters, you're very observant. As stated previously, it's the product of a rainy eve and is brought back to a more natural pitch. I don't think it matters, but a the source was never implied. References to the inspiration were made (Capitol Records' 1964 wall-o-sound interpretation), which is simulated 'stereo' (lows one channel, highs the other, drowned in reverb). Don't remember using an EQ on it, but a rev plug was.
@init4fun \\By EQ changed I meant in the original recording,. They are well masked in some masters, like Beatles Second Album, Collection of Beatles Oldies, and Past Masters...but in the clean and nearly untouched master found on mono masters, the eq changes between each edit and it sticks out like a sore thumb.
I too have had fun on rainy nights trying to recreate capitols duophonic sound but you simply can't. The rooms and equipment used are one of a kind.
Ps you may find it interesting to note that in She Loves You, I Want To Hold Your Hand, and other 'duophonic' mixes, it is a slight delay that is the primary tool used to ceate a 'stereo' effect. There may be some EQ done to left vs right in 'duophonic' but a time delay of about 100ms is the primary tool.
Contrast to "Love Me Do and "PS I Love You' on original stereo PPM that only use EQ to simulate stereo, and no time delay.
Ok, i got it! They recorded the music in G than they flat it down to F# and recorded the voice, and then they speed up all again to G. That's why the voices sound that way.
This could be the answer, but i've heard a lot of takes and they used to record music and voices together.....mah......it's a mistery
Your absolutely right..I like the original slower versions much better. The way the Beatles intended them to be. Would love to find a slower version of Love Me Do.
@buildelectriccarsnow You're obviously a late bloomer. Not an attempt at anything, really, apart from the more natural playback pitch. I made it, and am sorry if you don't care for it. But really wasn't fishing for approval. There are hundreds of others, if you don't care for it. If you were around in the US in the 60's or 70's, reverb (echo, as Capitol Records deemed it) was, with very few exceptions, all you heard (i.e. "The Beatles' Second Album"). It is how most Americans first heard SLY.
@buildelectriccarsnow Truly DO NOT give a f**k, dude. Am not interested in your under-educated opinions either. You've every right to dislike it, but, again, as this video was the product of pleasant rainy evening, I don't stay up nights worrying about what people like you think, guy. Don't flatter yourself. You've no idea what you're talking about. You obviously haven't heard the US releases or read up on it. So, please educate yourself before posting. Or don't. I really don't care.
@init4fun This is a wonderful job of putting photos together. And staying in the time period -- circa 1963. Many people at YT do songs like this (let's say She Loves You) and they will put a photo up from Magical Misery Tour. The end of the video is great, particularly. Thank you. Song sounds fine, btw.
@init4fun Well as the Beatles were English the way their records sounded here in Blighty is what I suppose you'd call authentic, and what we heard from the beginning was a brighter sound than this: November 20, 1963, live, the ABC, Ardwick, Manchester, 10/6 (ten shillings and sixpence) for a seat in front.
@paulphare Why would you suppose I'd call a heavily-mixed, reverb-drowned and American-bastardized recording "authentic?" As muddled as it sounded in the US, it was what it was. It no doubt sounded brighter live, sans the US Spector-ized "wall of sound" of the day. And congrats on scoring the decent seats. I also knew someone who saw them in England around that time. From the live recordings I've heard, it probably sounded much different, if not better.
this is a main reason of r & roll who made this fab band john playing like chuck george playing like carl (perkins) asshole this is the mainstream of all i love you too much BEATLES
i agree but if i listen to this song (on a cd, i mean) i can see that it's played in the key of G. How could they speed it up without changing the key?
i agree so if i listen to this song (on a cd, i mean) i can see that it's played in the key of G. How could they speed it up without changing the key?
@aejasso Because the underlying message resonates within all of us. It's genuine, hopeful, diverse and all about love and connectivity. Not much wrong with that.
I hear ya. I feel the same and I'm a 55 year old man! If I had a time machine I would go back to 1962 Liverpool to experience it all from the beginning.
I'm sure you know this but I have only just come across your video, the reason they were sped up is so that EMI could get an extra song on the album..... fact!!!! Oh forgot to say great pics awesome job my friend....
@ABarts68 Thanks for the compliment. But, with all due respect, you have no idea what you're talking about. If you had one iota about the history of The Beatles EMI vinyl releases, you'd know that their singles were NEVER released on albums. They were 45 rpm singles. THAT'S a "fact." One web search for "Beatles discography" will bear that out. SLY was never on a studio album. US subsidiaries of EMI packaged everything onto LP's, but The Beatles felt bundling singles on LP's was selling out.
@init4fun Actually their singles were at times released on official albums..."Come Together/Something" and "Yellow Submarine/Eleanor Rigby" are two of the exceptions.
@oceantracks OK, random guy who walks into a conversation, takes something out of historical context. 'She Loves You' was released as a single, no? The only time their singles were included on albums were machinations of record companies trying to cash in. Read the interviews. One of the reasons the Beatles are so highly regarded was that the band were offered obscene amounts of money to sell out, in various instances, but, as with their decision on singles, they, not EMI, retained dignity.
@init4fun Actually...not a random guy...pretty much a Beatles fan since 1964. So I'm an old random guy, and you're too young to know all the facts. You are talking about US Capitol Record policy, not British EMI. The Beatles made the decision themselves...in some cases...to include the single on the album, but yes, it was rare. It wasn't about "selling out," as The Beatles did not consider their singles to be "sell outs."
@oceantracks OK, "old guy." ;^] I was around to follow it too, wise guy. Get those facts straight. Capitol Records was a subsidiary of EMI & often broke ranks with the parent company's wishes, much to the chagrin of the band's associates, hence uncondoned singles, particularly from this era (early 60's). The "sell out" reference was more broad than just record sales. If you're as old as you suggest, you may know the offers the Beatles turned down were more noteworthy than the ones they accepted.
@init4fun ...Yes I know Capitol's history of mucking with their work. The policy of not putting singles on albums was common in England at the time, not just with The Beatles, yet there were exceptions, as I cited. It also seemed rather random, such as how they decided to include "Rigby" and "YS" on Revolver, while not including "PW" and "Rain," recorded during the same sessions.
@oceantracks It's called contractual obligation, and it's what spawned "Oldies But Goodies" in the UK & the "Butcher Album" (Yesterday, Today & Our Greatest Gravy Train) in the US. Singles were no exception to this obligation. By '66, they were outgrowing the pop genre. From interviews I've read, ER & YS were album recordings released as singles, rather than the other way around. So, by Revolver, it was clear their record companies were digging for singles. SFF & PL from SPLHCB was another.
I'm sure you know this but I have only just come across your video, the reason they were sped up is so that EMI could get an extra song on the album..... fact!!!!
Sounds like a mic moved position - even a small shift can make a big difference. It'd be surprising if they kept that, but maybe they figured it was a great take.
Living in New York in '64 as a 12 year old and having an AM radio glued to my ear ...and then having music like this hit you on the head like a sledge hammer...where only a short time ago the #1 song was by the "Singing Nun" ... well it just gives you a little insight to the fantastic frenzy we all felt and participated in.
This is the ultimate song. Thanks to this song i can remember what i was doing when i was 2 years old and can remember hearing watching them on "Top of the Pops" in england.Huge impact on my life, absolutely Huge.
@fab4fan4ever64 Thanks. Was actually a lot of fun to produce in FCP. I'd always hated how pitched forward the EMI releases were, so it had to see light.
This is an absolutely perfect rock 'n' roll record. There is not one flaw anywhere in this recording or this performance. I've listened to dozens of live versions of this track, and nothing can match the sheer excitement, energy, and joy they achieved in this one single recording. To this day, Ringo's opening drum fill makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.
@TheDiddlysquat it's on a compilation called "a collection of Beatles oldies" that was released in 1966, it features songs like "from me to you", "she loves you", "I want to hold your hand", "bad boy", and some stuff that had appeared on albums previously. but I think I get what you mean...they didn't include it on "with the beatles" or "a hard day's night". any other band with such a hit or later stuff like "hey jude" would make a record just to feature it as the first track!
One thing I can tell you, WAY back in the day when we were all in garage bands, you heard the new Stones song, or a Searcher's song and you said "Hey, we can do this" but when you heard a Beatles song it was always "No friggin way" LOL
Amazing mix mate! Sounds great with the echo. Think you can do that with She's Leaving Home as well? I like how the song sounds slowed down...sounds more...amazing! :)
@bobyoung53 No, just decades and decades of taped conversations, getting to know their voices. Another poster here made an excellent point earlier. True pitch detection IS a gift, and those who have it are very fortunate. This may not be completely accurate, but it's damn close and ONE HELLUVA lot closer than the EMI releases, which are ridiculously fast.
@init4fun the final version begins at Em, but slowing it down so it ends up beginning on Dm would be too much, I think d#m is right. I wonder if they sped it up to rise the pitch half a step up to E#m, or maybe they played it with the instruments detuned.
@init4fun this is a good job, the final version begins on Em but the voices sound more natural if you speed it down so it beings on D#m.
Dm would be too slow I think.....
I wonder if they were using detuned instruments or if they just played the song on D#m and then sped it up to get the pitch to Em.
oh, by the way, I used to listen to this song on a very old overused turntable that used to spin the records slower, and I liked it a lot more than in my working turntable that plays it properly :)
@kainthevampireduck Interesting & plausible theory. There are accounts of earlier recordings of bands tuning to themselves rather than pianos, pitch generators, etc. My inclination is to think the band may have tuned their instruments to one flatly-tuned instrument, which did happen, from all accounts. So, they were "in tune"...w/each other, not necessarily THE right tune (pitch). EMI's mastered release were clearly unnaturally fast. My point, as a historian, was just to present an alternative.
also, I think I already commented this on other video that had the song at a lower pitch, there's a not-very-official compilation released in south america, called "20 éxitos de oro", 20 greatest hits, and the songs are VERY slowed down compared with other records, so, "she loves you" at this pitch already. it's weird because it has 10 songs per side including "hey jude",and instead of speeding them up so they would fit, they slowed them down but they still fit!.
@init4fun oh, and there's a not-very-official "greatest hits" collection released in south america called "20 exitos de oro", (twenty golden hits), for some reason, ALL OF THE SONGS ARE SLOWED DOWN LIKE THIS, so in a regular turntable even with the record playing at the intented speed, this song sounds like this anyway.
it's amusing because that record has 10 tracks per side, including HEY JUDE!!, and instead of speeding them up so they would fit, they speeded them down!!. I still don't get it!
Firstly, an excellent video. Skillfull editing and great pic selection. For the audio, it's terrific. Non audiofiles take note, the true pitch (speed) allows for a more rounded sound, much better bottom end. The drums are also far less hissy and are punchier. This sounds better than any attempt, no matter how well meaning, to create a stereo version. True mono rules all when the master exists only in mono. Well done init4fun.
Recordings and live performances are slowed down and sped up all the time-for lots of reasons-the Beatles were aware of this too. I agree-just a great song.
@toymaster7425 I agree. When they began they were just 4 ordinary guys from Liverpool with a big musical und lyrical talent. They became more and more philosophers.
@toymaster7425 I like both their early stuff and their later stuff, but I think their post 66 albums are more creative and revolutionary, nobody had ever listened to or even seen something like "strawberry fields forever" or the whole pepper album. as great as the 63/64 beatles sound is, the really radical "HOLY SHIT, THESE GUYS ARE AWESOME" stuff can be found on "revolver" onwards. anyway, I'm not arguing, hehe, there is enough different beatles stuff for everybody :)
@kainthevampireduck You are absolutely right about the creativity like Strawberry Fields & Revolver LPs songs. My joy comes from "She Loves You" and "I Wanna Hold Your Hand". That's what started them to fame.When Lennon was asked in an interview later on what his favorite song is, he said "She Loves You." It had that "OHHH" while wiggling their heads back & forth which drove all the girls crazy and the last 4 Yeahs at the end of the song end in a perfect blend of harmony with a touch of reverb.
You are absolutely right about the creativity like Strawberry Fields & Revolver LPs songs. My joy comes from "She Loves You" and "I Wanna Hold Your Hand". That's what started them to fame.When Lennon was asked in an interview later on what his favorite song is, he said "She Loves You." It had that "OHHH" while wiggling their heads back & forth which drove all the girls crazy and the last 4 Yeahs at the end of the song end in a perfect blend of harmony with a touch of reverb.
@toymaster7425 "joy", that's the perfect word to describe their early stuff up till "a hard day's night". hehe, this song causes me joy too, in fact, I think it has something that affects directly the brain of the fans causing some kind of histerya :) it's the icon of beatlemania. but then they got tired, as early as "beatles for sale" you can tell something is different, they don't look happy on the cover, the album doesn't sound as joyful,and after 66, they went insane...in a good way :)
Under the conditions that "She Loves You" was recorded (the fans were running wild across the Abbey Road studios) it seems highly unlikely that they would have recorded something that needed to be sped up to build more energy. Strawberry Fields was patched from 2 "songs" 1/2 tone apart and there's plenty written about it, and that was with the varispeed, which they didn't have at this point. John Paul and Georges-both-would've noticed the flat tuning right away. I don't think this is the case.
@tomasmfc Wasn't there, so I wouldn't know. And I don't recall ever implying recordings were sped up to "build more energy." Believe what you like. That some of the Beatles earlier recordings were pressed slightly sped up is fairly obvious to anyone familiar with the group's voices. As for pitch controls on recording equipment, you may want to dig a little deeper in your research, as the first Ampex studio units featured them in the '40's. Any speed variations likely occurred during press.
@init4fun no need to get defensive. Just my opinion that what you're saying here is not accurate. I've listened closely to your recordings (inc the other 2) and I disagree that these recordings were sped up. Just listening to the voices won't give you accuracy. Some Beatles recordings were sped up when mastered or later with the Varispeed, sure, but not here & not 1/2 tone. "In my life" Martin played the piano @ 1/2 speed 1 octave lower and then played the tape 2x speed into the mixer.
@tomasmfc No one on this end really cares to get defensive. Congrats! You have an opinion I don't share. And, yes, many of us who've grown up following the music have read extensively on the releases (i.e. what was pitched back, who farted when, etc.). IOS was pressed faster than the recording. You seem smugly sure for someone who wasn't involved. But it is awesome to have folks around to set everyone straight. It's just a video, guy. If you don't care for it, it really is fine. I don't care.
One thing I noticed of this version is the heavy reverb applied to it, which seems to have been done after the slowing down. If this song was sped up, it would not have been the first or the last, but I don't think it was. "Thank You Girl" certainly was, as Geoff Emerick mentioned in his book, but there's no mention of it happening here. Two things don't seem right: 1- Speeding up a song 1/2 a step is way too much for it not to have created a stir. 2- John, Paul, and George (x2) would've noticed
Joe Meek sped up the Honeycombs track "HAVE I THE RIGHT" by a Tone (C major to D Major), to an Advantage, it sounded punchier and urgent ! He then allowed the Band's "SOMETHING BETTER BEGINNING" to be issued in the key it was played in, again, the right decision. She Loves You was right to be issued the way it was, and the Impact was Incredible !!!!
@TheNeilRoss I've written this before, but I honestly believe they occasionally tuned to one another early on. It's entirely possible that this was their G for that recorded session. Whether the pressings were pitched forward into tune or were sped to fall under 2:20 (2:18) is still speculation. Anyone who's heard their voices through interviews as often as I have (over four decades) can tell you the playback here sounds closer to their natural voices.
@AppleCorp3 Who knows? I certainly wouldn't. George Martin had control of the recordings to a certain extent; from interviews and voiced displeasure with EMI's American affiliate's 60's releases (oceans of reverb), Capitol Records, it would appear producing the masters was where his authority stopped. I am fairly confident I can discern when voices I'm familiar with are sped up. That recordings of that era made it to press at a higher pitch, I think, is fairly well documented. I do know voices.
@jayfey77 Yeah, it's admittedly not for everyone, particularly to those conditioned to hear it sped up as with the official release. That's fine. Sounds more natural, less contrived or like they're on helium or morphed into Alvin & The Chipmunks. It's no less exuberant or powerful to purists.
i dont think the old version sounds like they are on helium and the certainly dont sound like alvin and the chipmunks.it just sounds to spaced out and its missing its punch in the middle like mono has.
@jayfey77 As were many of their earlier EMI releases, it's unnaturally sped up to myself and others. It's fine. Like I wrote, it's not for everyone. Thanks for commenting.
doesnt matter to me if they were sped up or slowed down thats not whats wrong with this version here.its too seperated it has no punch.thats whats wrong with it.everything sounds so seperated and far away compared to the original.not the speed.in fact i dont even hear any difference in the speed.
@jayfey77 Great. Too bad you don't care for it, but I'm not sure it matters. Certainly doesn't to me, as I like it, obviously. Thanks again for expressing your opinion.
Norm never mentions the instruments used in the recording. Mark Lewisohn doesn't either. As an accomplished guitar player and owner of many Beatles guitars (including the 325)and others, I have a very trained ear. Neither one of us was at the session, so we will just disagree. People have given you compliments here, and you repay them with snarky comments. 5 stars for The Beatles song, 2 stars for your attitude. I give you the last word as I won't make any further comments.
@Flasoo8 Have no idea why you'd chose to take offense. Mayhaps you could check your attitude as to why you illicit the responses that you do from folks? In your mind, you have JL playing his trusty Rick. Great! Leave it at that. "Never" is a little presumptuous for someone who wasn't there. Isn't it? Smith DID recount the electric/acoustic or I wouldn't bother to mention it; there are two books and an article published, if you'd care to read them. And I don't post here for reinforcements, thx.
I love this slowed down version! One problem with the fake stereo on this song is while Ringo's cymbals are more audible, it drops John's bright chimey guitar out a bit. The reverb (or echo) is really good here too! Five stars!
I love this slowed down version! One problem with the fake stereo on this song is while Ringo's cymbals are more audible, it drops John's bright chimey guitar out a bit. The reverb (or echo) is really good here too! Five stars!
@Flasoo8 Thanks, but it is just closer to the natural speed of the original raw recordings. Nothing's been done to the EMI mix here; the omni-present open hi-hat Ringo was so fond of hasn't been enhanced, if that's what you've implied. It's a flat composite mix, so I couldn't if I wanted to anyway. And John is actually on a Gibson J-160E acoustic, so the pronounced "bright chimey" you hear would likely be George's Gretsch Duo Jet (pic @ 1:49) that accompanied him most in the studio during 1963.
@init4fun Slowed down from the released versions, to be clearer. I did not suggest you altered the mix, because no one really can, as the masters were recorded over and only a mono final mix exists. And that IS John's 1958 Rick 325 (ser no V81) being bright and chimey. George usually had his brighter tone or 'quality' turned down on his Gretsch during this period. Check your session bootlegs, you will hear it. Virtually all concert footage anywhere has John playing his Rick for this song.
@Flasoo8 Yeah, it's the J-160. The SLY session was well documented by Norm Smith, the group's first engineer, including his comical reaction to the lyrics before the group played it. But research it yourself. The strumming of the acoustic is as clear as a bell to some, but I guess, to the untrained ear, it isn't as easy. The fact that Lennon toured with the Ricky is irrelevant; he used the J-160 for the lead on I Feel Fine (feedback included) in studio as well, but mostly used the Ricky live.
@lazyboy285 Thanks. It's mono in EMI's fake stereo or duophonic, as it was once called, with the speed corrected. While there seem to be many that purport to have it, there really are no legitimate stereo mixes of the English version of She Loves You available, unfortunately. It's been alleged by George Martin and Norm Smith that any two track masters of SLY were wiped long ago.
@ init4fun This is BRILLIANT! WAAAAAAAAAY BETTER THAN the 'ordinary' realease. Thank U SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much 4 this. I'm 47 yrs old & have been a Beatles fan/obsessive for as long as I can remember & this is the very first time I've heard it like this. Didn't think their music could get any better but they are,after all, the best band ever & never cease to amaze.
@recordproducersrule While your theory is not off, according to documented sources close to the original film-making process, the recordings in 'A Hard Day's Night' were slower owing to a playback machine issue on the set. It was significantly slower. But it only enforces the notion that true (accurate) tape playback speeds were obviously not a priority, as some of the finished tracks released on vinyl and CD play back unnaturally fast, especially to those familiar with their speaking voices.
One more comment is that, according the excellent book "RECORDING THE BEATLES" by Curvebender press (the best on the market) may recordings throughout their catalog are sped up due to Martin overdubbing keyboard parts at half speed. The necessitated that when he increased the pitch upon re-inserting the track into the main master, it would create a slight pitch change for the rest of the parts or that strange effect heard on the piano SIs like Any Time at All or Rocky Raccoon etc.
As stated below, most early Beatles recordings are only slightly sped up but most maintain their key. A few DO go sharp by half or 1/4 step. With the Beatles LP demonstrates more pitch or key increase than on their first LP Please Please Me which had very few edits and overdubs as compared to all later sessions. Even Day Tripper is slightly sped up, at least on various imports and CD versions, a quarter step or sometimes from E to F.
That is not correct either, excluding the She Loves You/I'll Get You and Love Me Do/PS I Love Sessions, all the Beatles early recordings including Please Please Me single and LP sessions, From Me to You/Thank You Girl, and With the Beatles Sessions are all preserved as twin track STEREO raw masters with outtakes, chatter etc.. Many have surfaced as bootlegs. Past imports and the new remasters all include the full stereo versions of those early tunes except the tunes mentioned at the top.
@pookisnfenster Wrong! Read Lewisohn's book, and do some research. All early Beatles recordings from Parlophone were issued in mono, except the ones issued in simulated stereo by Capitol as released as the "American" versions of the song.
@dougalmac54 The first album the Beatles recorded for EMI was recorded on a two-track machine, so true "stereo" recordings do exist. I have several vinyl and CD UK and US recordings of the first handful of albums in true stereo. That said, there were SOME two track recordings intended as singles didn't survive. She Loves You is apparently one of them. George Martin moved to four track machines in 1964 or '65. The 1st 4 LP CD issues were released as mono, but true stereo tapes of them existed.
Also "Yeah Yeah Yeahs" are double tracked which is easy to tell when compared to live versions. Yes, its true many of the earlier Beatles recordings were subtlety sped up, for instance the outtakes of Hard Days night are about a half step below the final released mix. Martin tried to keep maintain the pitch when slightly speeding up. She Loves You is in G, I Wanna Hold Your Hand is in G, I Saw Her Standing There is in E, You Can't Do That is in G, Help in A etc.
@Bloke1962 The playback is slower but closer to the original raw recording, which was sped up when mastered. If you listen carefully to their voices in interviews and live performances, they sound nothing like the sped up voices appearing on the vinyl and CD releases. A Hard Day's Night is significantly slower than this owing to a playback equipment during the filming. That is well documented. What wasn't was how many of their recordings were sped up to master. Compare the voices for yourself.
The version released on Swan records (Phila. U.S.A. label 1963) sounds exactly like this and also the version in "A Hard Days Night". This must have been before the tampering by Capitol.
artificate 2 days ago
Just to keep you kiddies up to date...the week BEFORE "I want to hold your hand" was #1 on WABC (the flagship AM radio station in NYC) "Louie Louie"/Kingsmen was #1 followed by The Singing Nun at #2. Need I say more as to why we went crazy over them.
hollybuck123 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1:07 is john praying? 1:43 lol it goes with the oooo 2:21 baby faces
paloma598 1 week ago
beatles in eb tuning lol.
TehAnthrax 2 weeks ago
It sounds like a homemade job. The US 'She loves You' stereo mix did have extra reverb added, but this is nott it. This is slowed down, and sounds nothing like She Loves You on Beatles Second Album. From the EQ changes (that were very well masked in the US Stereo Version), it sounds like She Loves You from The Beatles In Mono with extra reverb added to that.
morninggloryseed 2 weeks ago
@morninggloryseed Congratulations! In as much as this matters, you're very observant. As stated previously, it's the product of a rainy eve and is brought back to a more natural pitch. I don't think it matters, but a the source was never implied. References to the inspiration were made (Capitol Records' 1964 wall-o-sound interpretation), which is simulated 'stereo' (lows one channel, highs the other, drowned in reverb). Don't remember using an EQ on it, but a rev plug was.
init4fun 2 weeks ago
@init4fun \\By EQ changed I meant in the original recording,. They are well masked in some masters, like Beatles Second Album, Collection of Beatles Oldies, and Past Masters...but in the clean and nearly untouched master found on mono masters, the eq changes between each edit and it sticks out like a sore thumb.
I too have had fun on rainy nights trying to recreate capitols duophonic sound but you simply can't. The rooms and equipment used are one of a kind.
morninggloryseed 2 weeks ago
@init4fun
Ps you may find it interesting to note that in She Loves You, I Want To Hold Your Hand, and other 'duophonic' mixes, it is a slight delay that is the primary tool used to ceate a 'stereo' effect. There may be some EQ done to left vs right in 'duophonic' but a time delay of about 100ms is the primary tool.
Contrast to "Love Me Do and "PS I Love You' on original stereo PPM that only use EQ to simulate stereo, and no time delay.
morninggloryseed 2 weeks ago
Who is that at 0:15?
blutocampbell 1 month ago
@blutocampbell That's John Lennon (a young john) then George.
I attended a Beatles concert here in St. Louis Mo, back in the day. Ticket was $5.00
327Butch 1 month ago
@blutocampbell john
paloma598 1 week ago
Comment removed
paloma598 1 month ago
Comment removed
paloma598 1 month ago
2 people are not orginal ;D
hyggo1 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
I like this slowed down version better than the sped up released versions.
nyerndc 1 month ago
added to favorites! thank you!!
alanmichaelwong 1 month ago
They are so incredible, it's unbelievable
danielmondana 2 months ago
Beatles 4ever!!!!
manhuntcash 2 months ago
I loved them then and I still love them now, I cry almost every time I listen to them, they don't make music like this anymore.
wolfieworldwide 2 months ago
Quintessence Mersey Beat.My number one!
TheRobertpiotr 2 months ago
i like this....sounds pure........
jumpingjack96 2 months ago
Brilliant.
The Beatles Forever !!
IFeelFine2011 3 months ago
I wish I had my original Parlaphone recordings!
n2uid01 3 months ago
1:44 PERFECT
MadSpectro7 3 months ago
Ok, i got it! They recorded the music in G than they flat it down to F# and recorded the voice, and then they speed up all again to G. That's why the voices sound that way.
This could be the answer, but i've heard a lot of takes and they used to record music and voices together.....mah......it's a mistery
maurus1965 3 months ago
Your absolutely right..I like the original slower versions much better. The way the Beatles intended them to be. Would love to find a slower version of Love Me Do.
johnkovak 3 months ago
My fav song evar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TheFairyShow 3 months ago in playlist TheFairyShow's favorites
A LOT of - - r e v e r b - - is added by "someone" !
Too bad , really :-/
Sounds like a clumsy attempt to achieve some ((( Stereo ))) effect .
buildelectriccarsnow 3 months ago
@buildelectriccarsnow You're obviously a late bloomer. Not an attempt at anything, really, apart from the more natural playback pitch. I made it, and am sorry if you don't care for it. But really wasn't fishing for approval. There are hundreds of others, if you don't care for it. If you were around in the US in the 60's or 70's, reverb (echo, as Capitol Records deemed it) was, with very few exceptions, all you heard (i.e. "The Beatles' Second Album"). It is how most Americans first heard SLY.
init4fun 3 months ago 8
@init4fun
You're obviously inclined at name-calling as well as getting your personal pride hurt .
I stand by the observation there's A LOT of added reverb, which, in lack of any reasonable cause,
appear to be derived from some gawky attempt to 'make it stereo'.
If all you heard in US was ^echo^ - "with very few exceptions" - you're really unfortunate,
but I have to say that's no surprise to me.
buildelectriccarsnow 3 months ago
@buildelectriccarsnow Truly DO NOT give a f**k, dude. Am not interested in your under-educated opinions either. You've every right to dislike it, but, again, as this video was the product of pleasant rainy evening, I don't stay up nights worrying about what people like you think, guy. Don't flatter yourself. You've no idea what you're talking about. You obviously haven't heard the US releases or read up on it. So, please educate yourself before posting. Or don't. I really don't care.
init4fun 3 months ago 5
@init4fun This is a wonderful job of putting photos together. And staying in the time period -- circa 1963. Many people at YT do songs like this (let's say She Loves You) and they will put a photo up from Magical Misery Tour. The end of the video is great, particularly. Thank you. Song sounds fine, btw.
ringu 3 months ago 3
@init4fun Well as the Beatles were English the way their records sounded here in Blighty is what I suppose you'd call authentic, and what we heard from the beginning was a brighter sound than this: November 20, 1963, live, the ABC, Ardwick, Manchester, 10/6 (ten shillings and sixpence) for a seat in front.
paulphare 2 months ago
@paulphare Why would you suppose I'd call a heavily-mixed, reverb-drowned and American-bastardized recording "authentic?" As muddled as it sounded in the US, it was what it was. It no doubt sounded brighter live, sans the US Spector-ized "wall of sound" of the day. And congrats on scoring the decent seats. I also knew someone who saw them in England around that time. From the live recordings I've heard, it probably sounded much different, if not better.
init4fun 2 months ago
@buildelectriccarsnow ur a fool, there is no extra reverb; it's the original recording, it will have reverb. Besides, sounds quite good actually
TheBuddyboy15 3 months ago
@buildelectriccarsnow A LOT of - - r u b b i sh - - is added by "someone"!
SO sad , really ;-[
Sounds like a clumsy attempt to insult someone who wanted to share their interest
in anything BEATLES, and init4fun CALLED YOUR BLUFF!!!!!!!
@buildyourselfabrainandgetacluenow!they'reonlyaquarter!!!!
mcjayc100 3 months ago
this is a main reason of r & roll who made this fab band john playing like chuck george playing like carl (perkins) asshole this is the mainstream of all i love you too much BEATLES
moondog294 3 months ago
listen to the words.......such a great song.
golfdude2007 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i agree but if i listen to this song (on a cd, i mean) i can see that it's played in the key of G. How could they speed it up without changing the key?
maurus1965 3 months ago
i agree so if i listen to this song (on a cd, i mean) i can see that it's played in the key of G. How could they speed it up without changing the key?
maurus1965 3 months ago
@maurus1965 cos your not changing the pitch
oeyeyea 3 months ago
Sorry but This mean that they played she loves you in F sharp ah not in G in the orginal version? Impossible!
maurus1965 3 months ago
@maurus1965 nah its panned down a half step,why would a guitar player use a wierd position like f sharp?
dempsey981 3 months ago
i can't explain my love for them, i just cry listening to them... quite pathetic? maybe but one of the best feelings ever
aejasso 3 months ago 21
@aejasso Because the underlying message resonates within all of us. It's genuine, hopeful, diverse and all about love and connectivity. Not much wrong with that.
init4fun 3 months ago 2
@aejasso
I hear ya. I feel the same and I'm a 55 year old man! If I had a time machine I would go back to 1962 Liverpool to experience it all from the beginning.
jgfergus 4 weeks ago
I'm sure you know this but I have only just come across your video, the reason they were sped up is so that EMI could get an extra song on the album..... fact!!!! Oh forgot to say great pics awesome job my friend....
ABarts68 4 months ago
@ABarts68 Thanks for the compliment. But, with all due respect, you have no idea what you're talking about. If you had one iota about the history of The Beatles EMI vinyl releases, you'd know that their singles were NEVER released on albums. They were 45 rpm singles. THAT'S a "fact." One web search for "Beatles discography" will bear that out. SLY was never on a studio album. US subsidiaries of EMI packaged everything onto LP's, but The Beatles felt bundling singles on LP's was selling out.
init4fun 4 months ago
@init4fun Actually their singles were at times released on official albums..."Come Together/Something" and "Yellow Submarine/Eleanor Rigby" are two of the exceptions.
oceantracks 4 months ago
@oceantracks OK, random guy who walks into a conversation, takes something out of historical context. 'She Loves You' was released as a single, no? The only time their singles were included on albums were machinations of record companies trying to cash in. Read the interviews. One of the reasons the Beatles are so highly regarded was that the band were offered obscene amounts of money to sell out, in various instances, but, as with their decision on singles, they, not EMI, retained dignity.
init4fun 4 months ago
@init4fun Actually...not a random guy...pretty much a Beatles fan since 1964. So I'm an old random guy, and you're too young to know all the facts. You are talking about US Capitol Record policy, not British EMI. The Beatles made the decision themselves...in some cases...to include the single on the album, but yes, it was rare. It wasn't about "selling out," as The Beatles did not consider their singles to be "sell outs."
oceantracks 4 months ago
@oceantracks OK, "old guy." ;^] I was around to follow it too, wise guy. Get those facts straight. Capitol Records was a subsidiary of EMI & often broke ranks with the parent company's wishes, much to the chagrin of the band's associates, hence uncondoned singles, particularly from this era (early 60's). The "sell out" reference was more broad than just record sales. If you're as old as you suggest, you may know the offers the Beatles turned down were more noteworthy than the ones they accepted.
init4fun 4 months ago
@init4fun ...Yes I know Capitol's history of mucking with their work. The policy of not putting singles on albums was common in England at the time, not just with The Beatles, yet there were exceptions, as I cited. It also seemed rather random, such as how they decided to include "Rigby" and "YS" on Revolver, while not including "PW" and "Rain," recorded during the same sessions.
oceantracks 4 months ago
@oceantracks It's called contractual obligation, and it's what spawned "Oldies But Goodies" in the UK & the "Butcher Album" (Yesterday, Today & Our Greatest Gravy Train) in the US. Singles were no exception to this obligation. By '66, they were outgrowing the pop genre. From interviews I've read, ER & YS were album recordings released as singles, rather than the other way around. So, by Revolver, it was clear their record companies were digging for singles. SFF & PL from SPLHCB was another.
init4fun 4 months ago
@init4fun @oceantracks Are you both proud of yourselves? You flooded the comment section with your bickering.
The420Roger 3 months ago
@The420Roger FU! It's my video! Don't like it? Scram, putz!
init4fun 3 months ago
@init4fun haha ill take that as a "yes" Thanks for the video though, its really cool.
The420Roger 3 months ago
I'm sure you know this but I have only just come across your video, the reason they were sped up is so that EMI could get an extra song on the album..... fact!!!!
ABarts68 4 months ago
I love the swirl in Ringo's hair at 1:39
BabyDoll12328 4 months ago
"get of you nit!"
BabyDoll12328 4 months ago
happy birthday john!
BabyDoll12328 4 months ago
omg god listen to 0:09 it sounds so sllooww
BabyDoll12328 4 months ago
i have this version on CD
i thiking thath iwas the original an yes its the original!!!!!!!!!!
anakinjfar 5 months ago
Great pictures!!!!!!!!!! Where did you find them?
ILoveTheBeatles618 5 months ago
how come at 1:24 the drum sound changes completely then goes back, this is on every she loves you audio i've ever heard
nightcrawler511 5 months ago
Sounds like a mic moved position - even a small shift can make a big difference. It'd be surprising if they kept that, but maybe they figured it was a great take.
BarryDennen12 4 months ago
Living in New York in '64 as a 12 year old and having an AM radio glued to my ear ...and then having music like this hit you on the head like a sledge hammer...where only a short time ago the #1 song was by the "Singing Nun" ... well it just gives you a little insight to the fantastic frenzy we all felt and participated in.
hollybuck123 5 months ago
This is the ultimate song. Thanks to this song i can remember what i was doing when i was 2 years old and can remember hearing watching them on "Top of the Pops" in england.Huge impact on my life, absolutely Huge.
grassy00 5 months ago
It's really cool with the reverb.
boilingpoint3 6 months ago
Seriously, has there ever been a better pop recording than this? Geogeous.
flimbambo 6 months ago
Excellent photo montage !!
fab4fan4ever64 6 months ago
@fab4fan4ever64 Thanks. Was actually a lot of fun to produce in FCP. I'd always hated how pitched forward the EMI releases were, so it had to see light.
init4fun 6 months ago
1:58 I looove john's expression ... But what is that haircut ?? it's just weird ...
YepaNokomis 7 months ago
You should make a video of come together with reverb. That would sound amazing :)
ninenine909 7 months ago
The stereo echo makes it sound nice. I like this "natural pitch" version. Good job!
memelvin1 7 months ago
This is an absolutely perfect rock 'n' roll record. There is not one flaw anywhere in this recording or this performance. I've listened to dozens of live versions of this track, and nothing can match the sheer excitement, energy, and joy they achieved in this one single recording. To this day, Ringo's opening drum fill makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.
dougalmac54 7 months ago 5
ok this is the first time i start using playlists and im puttin this as my first Beatles playlist song
JamNJohnN 8 months ago
If i could only have been there to witness the birth of this song...i've only played it like a thousand times since '64.
olmose 9 months ago
Beautiful
TheBeatlesShop 9 months ago
@TheDiddlysquat it's on a compilation called "a collection of Beatles oldies" that was released in 1966, it features songs like "from me to you", "she loves you", "I want to hold your hand", "bad boy", and some stuff that had appeared on albums previously. but I think I get what you mean...they didn't include it on "with the beatles" or "a hard day's night". any other band with such a hit or later stuff like "hey jude" would make a record just to feature it as the first track!
kainthevampireduck 10 months ago
too much echo in this version
portcreditdave 10 months ago
@portcreditdave Then take a hike.
init4fun 10 months ago 24
Always thought this was just an incredible song.....
olmose 10 months ago
One thing I can tell you, WAY back in the day when we were all in garage bands, you heard the new Stones song, or a Searcher's song and you said "Hey, we can do this" but when you heard a Beatles song it was always "No friggin way" LOL
hollybuck123 11 months ago 2
Amazing mix mate! Sounds great with the echo. Think you can do that with She's Leaving Home as well? I like how the song sounds slowed down...sounds more...amazing! :)
ninenine909 1 year ago
The Beatles;
Women wanted to be with them.
Men wanted to be them.
katebug35 1 year ago
@bobyoung53 No, just decades and decades of taped conversations, getting to know their voices. Another poster here made an excellent point earlier. True pitch detection IS a gift, and those who have it are very fortunate. This may not be completely accurate, but it's damn close and ONE HELLUVA lot closer than the EMI releases, which are ridiculously fast.
init4fun 1 year ago 2
@init4fun the final version begins at Em, but slowing it down so it ends up beginning on Dm would be too much, I think d#m is right. I wonder if they sped it up to rise the pitch half a step up to E#m, or maybe they played it with the instruments detuned.
kainthevampireduck 10 months ago
@init4fun this is a good job, the final version begins on Em but the voices sound more natural if you speed it down so it beings on D#m.
Dm would be too slow I think.....
I wonder if they were using detuned instruments or if they just played the song on D#m and then sped it up to get the pitch to Em.
oh, by the way, I used to listen to this song on a very old overused turntable that used to spin the records slower, and I liked it a lot more than in my working turntable that plays it properly :)
kainthevampireduck 10 months ago
@kainthevampireduck Interesting & plausible theory. There are accounts of earlier recordings of bands tuning to themselves rather than pianos, pitch generators, etc. My inclination is to think the band may have tuned their instruments to one flatly-tuned instrument, which did happen, from all accounts. So, they were "in tune"...w/each other, not necessarily THE right tune (pitch). EMI's mastered release were clearly unnaturally fast. My point, as a historian, was just to present an alternative.
init4fun 9 months ago
@init4fun it's a good point :)
also, I think I already commented this on other video that had the song at a lower pitch, there's a not-very-official compilation released in south america, called "20 éxitos de oro", 20 greatest hits, and the songs are VERY slowed down compared with other records, so, "she loves you" at this pitch already. it's weird because it has 10 songs per side including "hey jude",and instead of speeding them up so they would fit, they slowed them down but they still fit!.
kainthevampireduck 9 months ago
@init4fun i do this sometimes too. slow it down to the original recording like when im 64 and dont bother me and others. nice job.
BEARARMZ 9 months ago
@init4fun oh, and there's a not-very-official "greatest hits" collection released in south america called "20 exitos de oro", (twenty golden hits), for some reason, ALL OF THE SONGS ARE SLOWED DOWN LIKE THIS, so in a regular turntable even with the record playing at the intented speed, this song sounds like this anyway.
it's amusing because that record has 10 tracks per side, including HEY JUDE!!, and instead of speeding them up so they would fit, they speeded them down!!. I still don't get it!
kainthevampireduck 10 months ago
Firstly, an excellent video. Skillfull editing and great pic selection. For the audio, it's terrific. Non audiofiles take note, the true pitch (speed) allows for a more rounded sound, much better bottom end. The drums are also far less hissy and are punchier. This sounds better than any attempt, no matter how well meaning, to create a stereo version. True mono rules all when the master exists only in mono. Well done init4fun.
charlyW34 1 year ago 2
lol 1:59, wth? XDDDD
BryanArwing 1 year ago 6
@BryanArwing "And this is a nipple, Paul"
gtrmu 5 months ago
Recordings and live performances are slowed down and sped up all the time-for lots of reasons-the Beatles were aware of this too. I agree-just a great song.
daanje1062 1 year ago
@daanje1062
If they were sped up it was because it was thought it increased the energy and excitement. Sometimes DJs do it as well.
They did it to a lot of the Fats Domino recordings.
njnorth1 1 year ago
wheree did you get thessee piks theree adorablee!
Ashlee1007 1 year ago
@Ashlee1007 Thx. The Googles. "Beatles 1963." Really slaved over that one, huh? x]
init4fun 1 year ago
you are definitely on a mission from God. not that there's anything wrong with that :))
Rawego 1 year ago
@Rawego Ha! Not really. Just a stickler for posterity and historic accuracy.
init4fun 1 year ago
Yea, like this original speed the best. Just a great song anyway you go.
olmose 1 year ago
to much reverb or what ever it is.,! haha but still a good song : )
1964GuitarCovers 1 year ago
I didnt notice the change (im not a musician btw) but i've always think that this song is faster than normal for some reason...
lcharsl 1 year ago
No offense, but who cares if it was sped up or not? It sounds good and that's all that matters. Just my opinion, anyways. :-)
jankbass 1 year ago
@jankbass everyone's got one. you're entitled to it. peace.
init4fun 1 year ago
paul mccartney has a youtube account!
aryowailangitoyo97 1 year ago
@aryowailangitoyo97 really?
rachelbsays 1 year ago
@aryowailangitoyo97 wats his name
theJimJessup 1 year ago
This is my favorite song by The Beatles. This is what The Beatles are all about, not the later albums.
toymaster7425 1 year ago 3
@toymaster7425 I agree. When they began they were just 4 ordinary guys from Liverpool with a big musical und lyrical talent. They became more and more philosophers.
SgtOBrien 1 year ago
@toymaster7425 I like both their early stuff and their later stuff, but I think their post 66 albums are more creative and revolutionary, nobody had ever listened to or even seen something like "strawberry fields forever" or the whole pepper album. as great as the 63/64 beatles sound is, the really radical "HOLY SHIT, THESE GUYS ARE AWESOME" stuff can be found on "revolver" onwards. anyway, I'm not arguing, hehe, there is enough different beatles stuff for everybody :)
kainthevampireduck 10 months ago
@kainthevampireduck You are absolutely right about the creativity like Strawberry Fields & Revolver LPs songs. My joy comes from "She Loves You" and "I Wanna Hold Your Hand". That's what started them to fame.When Lennon was asked in an interview later on what his favorite song is, he said "She Loves You." It had that "OHHH" while wiggling their heads back & forth which drove all the girls crazy and the last 4 Yeahs at the end of the song end in a perfect blend of harmony with a touch of reverb.
toymaster7425 10 months ago
You are absolutely right about the creativity like Strawberry Fields & Revolver LPs songs. My joy comes from "She Loves You" and "I Wanna Hold Your Hand". That's what started them to fame.When Lennon was asked in an interview later on what his favorite song is, he said "She Loves You." It had that "OHHH" while wiggling their heads back & forth which drove all the girls crazy and the last 4 Yeahs at the end of the song end in a perfect blend of harmony with a touch of reverb.
toymaster7425 10 months ago
@toymaster7425 "joy", that's the perfect word to describe their early stuff up till "a hard day's night". hehe, this song causes me joy too, in fact, I think it has something that affects directly the brain of the fans causing some kind of histerya :) it's the icon of beatlemania. but then they got tired, as early as "beatles for sale" you can tell something is different, they don't look happy on the cover, the album doesn't sound as joyful,and after 66, they went insane...in a good way :)
kainthevampireduck 10 months ago
wauw they were really handsome chaps!
PlyTwxy 1 year ago
there is a believe that increasing the speed an rpm or 2 increases the excitement.
It was done to most of Fats Domino's recordings.
Some DJ also do it when playing records.
njnorth1 1 year ago
Under the conditions that "She Loves You" was recorded (the fans were running wild across the Abbey Road studios) it seems highly unlikely that they would have recorded something that needed to be sped up to build more energy. Strawberry Fields was patched from 2 "songs" 1/2 tone apart and there's plenty written about it, and that was with the varispeed, which they didn't have at this point. John Paul and Georges-both-would've noticed the flat tuning right away. I don't think this is the case.
tomasmfc 1 year ago
@tomasmfc Wasn't there, so I wouldn't know. And I don't recall ever implying recordings were sped up to "build more energy." Believe what you like. That some of the Beatles earlier recordings were pressed slightly sped up is fairly obvious to anyone familiar with the group's voices. As for pitch controls on recording equipment, you may want to dig a little deeper in your research, as the first Ampex studio units featured them in the '40's. Any speed variations likely occurred during press.
init4fun 1 year ago
@init4fun no need to get defensive. Just my opinion that what you're saying here is not accurate. I've listened closely to your recordings (inc the other 2) and I disagree that these recordings were sped up. Just listening to the voices won't give you accuracy. Some Beatles recordings were sped up when mastered or later with the Varispeed, sure, but not here & not 1/2 tone. "In my life" Martin played the piano @ 1/2 speed 1 octave lower and then played the tape 2x speed into the mixer.
tomasmfc 1 year ago
@tomasmfc No one on this end really cares to get defensive. Congrats! You have an opinion I don't share. And, yes, many of us who've grown up following the music have read extensively on the releases (i.e. what was pitched back, who farted when, etc.). IOS was pressed faster than the recording. You seem smugly sure for someone who wasn't involved. But it is awesome to have folks around to set everyone straight. It's just a video, guy. If you don't care for it, it really is fine. I don't care.
init4fun 1 year ago
@tomasmfc
I don't know if the is natural speed or not but sounds like their more comfortable than manic in their performance here to me
njnorth1 1 year ago
One thing I noticed of this version is the heavy reverb applied to it, which seems to have been done after the slowing down. If this song was sped up, it would not have been the first or the last, but I don't think it was. "Thank You Girl" certainly was, as Geoff Emerick mentioned in his book, but there's no mention of it happening here. Two things don't seem right: 1- Speeding up a song 1/2 a step is way too much for it not to have created a stir. 2- John, Paul, and George (x2) would've noticed
tomasmfc 1 year ago
Joe Meek sped up the Honeycombs track "HAVE I THE RIGHT" by a Tone (C major to D Major), to an Advantage, it sounded punchier and urgent ! He then allowed the Band's "SOMETHING BETTER BEGINNING" to be issued in the key it was played in, again, the right decision. She Loves You was right to be issued the way it was, and the Impact was Incredible !!!!
gazzymodo 1 year ago
Wow. I love this! Much better when I compare the two. This still retains great power without the rushed feeling.
donwhite52 1 year ago
sounds great. Although its in F# rather than G. Do you think they tuned their instruments down one semitone?
TheNeilRoss 1 year ago
@TheNeilRoss I've written this before, but I honestly believe they occasionally tuned to one another early on. It's entirely possible that this was their G for that recorded session. Whether the pressings were pitched forward into tune or were sped to fall under 2:20 (2:18) is still speculation. Anyone who's heard their voices through interviews as often as I have (over four decades) can tell you the playback here sounds closer to their natural voices.
init4fun 1 year ago
@init4fun I think you've got your points right on... The voice pitch is super accurate...
GoldenSlumbers1956 1 year ago
@init4fun Interesting theory. Do you think George Martin would have let them get away with that?! :)
AppleCorp3 1 year ago
@AppleCorp3 Who knows? I certainly wouldn't. George Martin had control of the recordings to a certain extent; from interviews and voiced displeasure with EMI's American affiliate's 60's releases (oceans of reverb), Capitol Records, it would appear producing the masters was where his authority stopped. I am fairly confident I can discern when voices I'm familiar with are sped up. That recordings of that era made it to press at a higher pitch, I think, is fairly well documented. I do know voices.
init4fun 1 year ago
this may be the original speed but it sounds awful it sounds like its lost its punch.sounds weak.
jayfey77 1 year ago
@jayfey77 Yeah, it's admittedly not for everyone, particularly to those conditioned to hear it sped up as with the official release. That's fine. Sounds more natural, less contrived or like they're on helium or morphed into Alvin & The Chipmunks. It's no less exuberant or powerful to purists.
init4fun 1 year ago
i dont think the old version sounds like they are on helium and the certainly dont sound like alvin and the chipmunks.it just sounds to spaced out and its missing its punch in the middle like mono has.
jayfey77 1 year ago
@jayfey77 As were many of their earlier EMI releases, it's unnaturally sped up to myself and others. It's fine. Like I wrote, it's not for everyone. Thanks for commenting.
init4fun 1 year ago
doesnt matter to me if they were sped up or slowed down thats not whats wrong with this version here.its too seperated it has no punch.thats whats wrong with it.everything sounds so seperated and far away compared to the original.not the speed.in fact i dont even hear any difference in the speed.
jayfey77 1 year ago
@jayfey77 Great. Too bad you don't care for it, but I'm not sure it matters. Certainly doesn't to me, as I like it, obviously. Thanks again for expressing your opinion.
init4fun 1 year ago
LMAO johns face at 1:45!!
DannyEJW 1 year ago
Paul and Ringo are still alive ask those guys
vxenon67 1 year ago
Norm never mentions the instruments used in the recording. Mark Lewisohn doesn't either. As an accomplished guitar player and owner of many Beatles guitars (including the 325)and others, I have a very trained ear. Neither one of us was at the session, so we will just disagree. People have given you compliments here, and you repay them with snarky comments. 5 stars for The Beatles song, 2 stars for your attitude. I give you the last word as I won't make any further comments.
Flasoo8 1 year ago
@Flasoo8 Have no idea why you'd chose to take offense. Mayhaps you could check your attitude as to why you illicit the responses that you do from folks? In your mind, you have JL playing his trusty Rick. Great! Leave it at that. "Never" is a little presumptuous for someone who wasn't there. Isn't it? Smith DID recount the electric/acoustic or I wouldn't bother to mention it; there are two books and an article published, if you'd care to read them. And I don't post here for reinforcements, thx.
init4fun 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I love this slowed down version! One problem with the fake stereo on this song is while Ringo's cymbals are more audible, it drops John's bright chimey guitar out a bit. The reverb (or echo) is really good here too! Five stars!
Flasoo8 1 year ago
I love this slowed down version! One problem with the fake stereo on this song is while Ringo's cymbals are more audible, it drops John's bright chimey guitar out a bit. The reverb (or echo) is really good here too! Five stars!
Flasoo8 1 year ago
@Flasoo8 Thanks, but it is just closer to the natural speed of the original raw recordings. Nothing's been done to the EMI mix here; the omni-present open hi-hat Ringo was so fond of hasn't been enhanced, if that's what you've implied. It's a flat composite mix, so I couldn't if I wanted to anyway. And John is actually on a Gibson J-160E acoustic, so the pronounced "bright chimey" you hear would likely be George's Gretsch Duo Jet (pic @ 1:49) that accompanied him most in the studio during 1963.
init4fun 1 year ago
@init4fun Slowed down from the released versions, to be clearer. I did not suggest you altered the mix, because no one really can, as the masters were recorded over and only a mono final mix exists. And that IS John's 1958 Rick 325 (ser no V81) being bright and chimey. George usually had his brighter tone or 'quality' turned down on his Gretsch during this period. Check your session bootlegs, you will hear it. Virtually all concert footage anywhere has John playing his Rick for this song.
Flasoo8 1 year ago
@Flasoo8 Yeah, it's the J-160. The SLY session was well documented by Norm Smith, the group's first engineer, including his comical reaction to the lyrics before the group played it. But research it yourself. The strumming of the acoustic is as clear as a bell to some, but I guess, to the untrained ear, it isn't as easy. The fact that Lennon toured with the Ricky is irrelevant; he used the J-160 for the lead on I Feel Fine (feedback included) in studio as well, but mostly used the Ricky live.
init4fun 1 year ago
i luv when ringo looked at the microphone like it was gonna eat him XD
Korwia 1 year ago
I don't have the original to hand, but this doesn't sound much slower than it - or is my memory failing?
bunchie1966 1 year ago
doesent make me smile much as the other
BobDylanFan1966 1 year ago
i love how you can hear the echo
cmlbeatlefreak 1 year ago
Where did you get this??? This is an amazing stereo mix, even if the original was never remixed in stereo.
lazyboy285 1 year ago
@lazyboy285 Thanks. It's mono in EMI's fake stereo or duophonic, as it was once called, with the speed corrected. While there seem to be many that purport to have it, there really are no legitimate stereo mixes of the English version of She Loves You available, unfortunately. It's been alleged by George Martin and Norm Smith that any two track masters of SLY were wiped long ago.
init4fun 1 year ago
@ init4fun This is BRILLIANT! WAAAAAAAAAY BETTER THAN the 'ordinary' realease. Thank U SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much 4 this. I'm 47 yrs old & have been a Beatles fan/obsessive for as long as I can remember & this is the very first time I've heard it like this. Didn't think their music could get any better but they are,after all, the best band ever & never cease to amaze.
DomW63 1 year ago
@DomW63 Thanks. Glad you like it better at a more natural playback speed.
init4fun 1 year ago
I love this speed , all my life i listen in this speed !
epiphonejapan 1 year ago
@recordproducersrule While your theory is not off, according to documented sources close to the original film-making process, the recordings in 'A Hard Day's Night' were slower owing to a playback machine issue on the set. It was significantly slower. But it only enforces the notion that true (accurate) tape playback speeds were obviously not a priority, as some of the finished tracks released on vinyl and CD play back unnaturally fast, especially to those familiar with their speaking voices.
init4fun 1 year ago
american's were short changed again !
stevaturesve 1 year ago
One more comment is that, according the excellent book "RECORDING THE BEATLES" by Curvebender press (the best on the market) may recordings throughout their catalog are sped up due to Martin overdubbing keyboard parts at half speed. The necessitated that when he increased the pitch upon re-inserting the track into the main master, it would create a slight pitch change for the rest of the parts or that strange effect heard on the piano SIs like Any Time at All or Rocky Raccoon etc.
pookisnfenster 1 year ago
As stated below, most early Beatles recordings are only slightly sped up but most maintain their key. A few DO go sharp by half or 1/4 step. With the Beatles LP demonstrates more pitch or key increase than on their first LP Please Please Me which had very few edits and overdubs as compared to all later sessions. Even Day Tripper is slightly sped up, at least on various imports and CD versions, a quarter step or sometimes from E to F.
pookisnfenster 1 year ago
That is not correct either, excluding the She Loves You/I'll Get You and Love Me Do/PS I Love Sessions, all the Beatles early recordings including Please Please Me single and LP sessions, From Me to You/Thank You Girl, and With the Beatles Sessions are all preserved as twin track STEREO raw masters with outtakes, chatter etc.. Many have surfaced as bootlegs. Past imports and the new remasters all include the full stereo versions of those early tunes except the tunes mentioned at the top.
pookisnfenster 1 year ago
@pookisnfenster Wrong! Read Lewisohn's book, and do some research. All early Beatles recordings from Parlophone were issued in mono, except the ones issued in simulated stereo by Capitol as released as the "American" versions of the song.
dougalmac54 1 year ago
@dougalmac54 The first album the Beatles recorded for EMI was recorded on a two-track machine, so true "stereo" recordings do exist. I have several vinyl and CD UK and US recordings of the first handful of albums in true stereo. That said, there were SOME two track recordings intended as singles didn't survive. She Loves You is apparently one of them. George Martin moved to four track machines in 1964 or '65. The 1st 4 LP CD issues were released as mono, but true stereo tapes of them existed.
init4fun 1 year ago
Also "Yeah Yeah Yeahs" are double tracked which is easy to tell when compared to live versions. Yes, its true many of the earlier Beatles recordings were subtlety sped up, for instance the outtakes of Hard Days night are about a half step below the final released mix. Martin tried to keep maintain the pitch when slightly speeding up. She Loves You is in G, I Wanna Hold Your Hand is in G, I Saw Her Standing There is in E, You Can't Do That is in G, Help in A etc.
pookisnfenster 1 year ago
Fake Stereo version remixed and slowed down by Capitol records for the "Beatles Second Album" Also heard in "A Hard day's Night"
Bloke1962 1 year ago
@Bloke1962 The playback is slower but closer to the original raw recording, which was sped up when mastered. If you listen carefully to their voices in interviews and live performances, they sound nothing like the sped up voices appearing on the vinyl and CD releases. A Hard Day's Night is significantly slower than this owing to a playback equipment during the filming. That is well documented. What wasn't was how many of their recordings were sped up to master. Compare the voices for yourself.
init4fun 1 year ago
this video has AMAZING pictures! i love them all! :)
joelyssabeatles 1 year ago