The Beatles — Within You Without You/Tomorrow Never Knows
Album: LoveAvg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 1450
Length: 2:28
Plays (last 30 days): 1
share
tweet
Turn off your mind, relax and float downstream
It is not dying, it is not dying
We were talking
About the space between us all
And the people
Who hide themselves behind a wall of illusion
Never glimpse the truth
Then it's far too late
When they pass away
We were talking
About the love we all could share
When we find it
To try our best to hold it there with our love
With our love, we could save the world
If they only knew
Try to realize it's all within yourself
No one else can make you change
And to see you're really only very small
And life flows on within you and without you
It is not dying, it is not dying
We were talking
About the space between us all
And the people
Who hide themselves behind a wall of illusion
Never glimpse the truth
Then it's far too late
When they pass away
We were talking
About the love we all could share
When we find it
To try our best to hold it there with our love
With our love, we could save the world
If they only knew
Try to realize it's all within yourself
No one else can make you change
And to see you're really only very small
And life flows on within you and without you
Comments (254)add comment
Is this really Ringo Starr on drums?
The only track off this album I've been able to enjoy
speaking words of wisdom...George nails it
algrif wrote:
...and a Muslim said it hundreds of years earlier. There are many Christian writings and stories that were based on religious writings that well preceded the start of Christianity. For instance the 3 Wisemen following the star to Christ's manger. Or should I say crib?
Christianity is the 3rd or fourth iteration.
hippiechick wrote:
Except for the bit about ".. Try to realise its all within yourself.. " Jesus already said all this nearly 2000 years ago.
...and a Muslim said it hundreds of years earlier. There are many Christian writings and stories that were based on religious writings that well preceded the start of Christianity. For instance the 3 Wisemen following the star to Christ's manger. Or should I say crib?
Christianity is the 3rd or fourth iteration.
Awesome mashup.
p.bayliss43 wrote:
These guys were revolutionary in the studio. Their post-touring-in-studio recordings paved the way for multitrack recording as we hear in nearly everything that came after them. In Tomorrow Never Knows it is actually the engineer PLAYING the soundboard with prerecorded tape loops, including Paul's laughter, making the recording a live recorded performance that became part of the song. Very good stuff!
This is a mix up of a track from Revolver and Sgt Peppers. The lyrics of Tomorrow Never Knows is from “The Psychedelic Experience: A Manual Based on the Tibetan Book of the Dead by Timothy Leary, Richard Alpert and Ralph Metzner”. I prefer the original version (of the song) on the album Revolver, the first really psychedelic song the Beatles did. It was very innovative for 54 years ago with a sitar and other Indian instruments, loop effects, overdubs, reversed guitar parts and vocals out of a revolving speaker (Leslie cabinet), so that John could sound "like the Dalai Lama singing from a mountaintop". I heard that it made a big impression on Ken Kesey's Merry Pranksters at the time (1966). It's still one of my favorites.
These guys were revolutionary in the studio. Their post-touring-in-studio recordings paved the way for multitrack recording as we hear in nearly everything that came after them. In Tomorrow Never Knows it is actually the engineer PLAYING the soundboard with prerecorded tape loops, including Paul's laughter, making the recording a live recorded performance that became part of the song. Very good stuff!
As a serious die-hard Beatles fan I'm always critical of covers and the like. But I REALLY enjoy what they did with this for Cirque de Soloeil. After all, it's Beatle approved!
This is a mix up of a track from Revolver and Sgt Peppers. The lyrics of Tomorrow Never Knows is from “The Psychedelic Experience: A Manual Based on the Tibetan Book of the Dead by Timothy Leary, Richard Alpert and Ralph Metzner”. I prefer the original version (of the song) on the album Revolver, the first really psychedelic song the Beatles did. It was very innovative for 54 years ago with a sitar and other Indian instruments, loop effects, overdubs, reversed guitar parts and vocals out of a revolving speaker (Leslie cabinet), so that John could sound "like the Dalai Lama singing from a mountaintop". I heard that it made a big impression on Ken Kesey's Merry Pranksters at the time (1966). It's still one of my favorites.
Oh... Fudge yeah... and I didn't say "Fudge".
This is better than the original Beatles. I still skipped past this half way through. My very much in the minority opinion. I've learned to appreciate the Beatles more over the years. I actually like a couple of their songs, but I still can't get past the whiny voices.
Still, please play on. The more mixed up the music is, the better. I like the eclectic version of this station even more.
Still, please play on. The more mixed up the music is, the better. I like the eclectic version of this station even more.
VH1 wrote:
Really? Well, do Ringo and Paul know they are dead?
And life flows on within you and without you.
Really? Well, do Ringo and Paul know they are dead?
And life flows on within you and without you.
Mash up of two of of favourite Beatles songs.. How have I not heard this before?!
I blame yoko
Ick, you're awesome!
ick wrote:
I hear Dead People!
ick wrote:
I hear Dead People!
rpdevotee wrote:
It was done by Sir George Martin and his son with Paul and Ringo's blessing. That works for me!
I don't understand how the artist can be listed as the Beatles when the Beatles never recorded this mix.
"Love is a soundtrack remix album of music recorded by the Beatles, released in November 2006. It features music compiled and remixed as a mashup for the Cirque du Soleil show of the same name"
Because Tomorrow Never Knows rises to virtual sacrosanct status IMHO, I personally find this mix to be blasphemous.
"Love is a soundtrack remix album of music recorded by the Beatles, released in November 2006. It features music compiled and remixed as a mashup for the Cirque du Soleil show of the same name"
Because Tomorrow Never Knows rises to virtual sacrosanct status IMHO, I personally find this mix to be blasphemous.
It was done by Sir George Martin and his son with Paul and Ringo's blessing. That works for me!
rpdevotee wrote:
Beatles singing. Beatles playing. Who else would be listed? I suppose you could add "DJ WhatsHisFace" to the credits. But not as a performer, surely.
I don't understand how the artist can be listed as the Beatles when the Beatles never recorded this mix.
"Love is a soundtrack remix album of music recorded by the Beatles, released in November 2006. It features music compiled and remixed as a mashup for the Cirque du Soleil show of the same name"
Because Tomorrow Never Knows rises to virtual sacrosanct status IMHO, I personally find this mix to be blasphemous.
"Love is a soundtrack remix album of music recorded by the Beatles, released in November 2006. It features music compiled and remixed as a mashup for the Cirque du Soleil show of the same name"
Because Tomorrow Never Knows rises to virtual sacrosanct status IMHO, I personally find this mix to be blasphemous.
Beatles singing. Beatles playing. Who else would be listed? I suppose you could add "DJ WhatsHisFace" to the credits. But not as a performer, surely.
Thanks, George. And Bill.
But to my ears, this mix of one of my 10 or 20 fav tunes of the Fabs is a mixed up mash.
But to my ears, this mix of one of my 10 or 20 fav tunes of the Fabs is a mixed up mash.
I don't understand how the artist can be listed as the Beatles when the Beatles never recorded this mix.
"Love is a soundtrack remix album of music recorded by the Beatles, released in November 2006. It features music compiled and remixed as a mashup for the Cirque du Soleil show of the same name"
Because Tomorrow Never Knows rises to virtual sacrosanct status IMHO, I personally find this mix to be blasphemous.
"Love is a soundtrack remix album of music recorded by the Beatles, released in November 2006. It features music compiled and remixed as a mashup for the Cirque du Soleil show of the same name"
Because Tomorrow Never Knows rises to virtual sacrosanct status IMHO, I personally find this mix to be blasphemous.
This pretty good mashup of Beatles classics had my hackles up at first. I wouldn't spin it on my own, but I can say "its 2017" and go with the flow if RP puts it on. I agree that "Tomorrow Never Knows" belongs at the end of "Revolver". In context, it signals the end of an era for the Beatles, and arguably for popular music. But in 2017, what is permanent and sacred?
Clever segue there Bill...from within You Without You > To Be Where's There Life
Thanks!
Thanks!
GetBakedTonight wrote:
Totally disagree. A loving re-imaging of the original musical ideas. Particularly engaging in surround.
The original songs were timeless jewels. This is speculative cr*p.
And this on RP?
And this on RP?
Totally disagree. A loving re-imaging of the original musical ideas. Particularly engaging in surround.
October 9, 1940,...Happy Birthday!
The original songs were timeless jewels. This is speculative cr*p.
And this on RP?
And this on RP?
ick wrote:
I hear Dead People!
Really? Well, do Ringo and Paul know they are dead?
I hear Dead People!
Really? Well, do Ringo and Paul know they are dead?
jmsmy wrote:
My wife and I saw the LOVE show in November 2015, and we wholeheartedly agree! It was simply amazing, and the sound was phenomenal.
Amazing - the BEST thing in Vegas
My wife and I saw the LOVE show in November 2015, and we wholeheartedly agree! It was simply amazing, and the sound was phenomenal.
I hear you, but it sure is nice to experience this music with the added pleasures associated with todays recording methods. Kind of like a 1963 Corvette with an upgrade to disc brakes..modernizing something beautiful is not always a bad thing..however I certainly understand your point of view as well. I really can appreciate authenticity. It is a fine line we walk. adib wrote:
Regardless of the worthiness of those involved - it's lost the drive of the original versions.
Tomorrow Never Knows *needs* to sit at the end of Revolver - it's just not right in any other place.
I'm all up for new ideas, new concepts and change - but a rehash of something which was perfectly placed (and a 10/10 from me) in its own time seems a poor idea to me... This gets a 7 from me, which is generous, and purely based on the quality of the source material.
Tomorrow Never Knows *needs* to sit at the end of Revolver - it's just not right in any other place.
I'm all up for new ideas, new concepts and change - but a rehash of something which was perfectly placed (and a 10/10 from me) in its own time seems a poor idea to me... This gets a 7 from me, which is generous, and purely based on the quality of the source material.
adib wrote:
Regardless of the worthiness of those involved - it's lost the drive of the original versions.
Tomorrow Never Knows *needs* to sit at the end of Revolver - it's just not right in any other place.
I'm all up for new ideas, new concepts and change - but a rehash of something which was perfectly placed (and a 10/10 from me) in its own time seems a poor idea to me... This gets a 7 from me, which is generous, and purely based on the quality of the source material.
Boring opinion!
Tomorrow Never Knows *needs* to sit at the end of Revolver - it's just not right in any other place.
I'm all up for new ideas, new concepts and change - but a rehash of something which was perfectly placed (and a 10/10 from me) in its own time seems a poor idea to me... This gets a 7 from me, which is generous, and purely based on the quality of the source material.
Boring opinion!
Outstanding mix.
Regardless of the worthiness of those involved - it's lost the drive of the original versions.
Tomorrow Never Knows *needs* to sit at the end of Revolver - it's just not right in any other place.
I'm all up for new ideas, new concepts and change - but a rehash of something which was perfectly placed (and a 10/10 from me) in its own time seems a poor idea to me... This gets a 7 from me, which is generous, and purely based on the quality of the source material.
Tomorrow Never Knows *needs* to sit at the end of Revolver - it's just not right in any other place.
I'm all up for new ideas, new concepts and change - but a rehash of something which was perfectly placed (and a 10/10 from me) in its own time seems a poor idea to me... This gets a 7 from me, which is generous, and purely based on the quality of the source material.
jmsmy wrote:
What about the deep-fried Mars bars?
Amazing - the BEST thing in Vegas
What about the deep-fried Mars bars?
ick wrote:
I hear Dead People!
Yes, if you listen carefully....
I hear Dead People!
Yes, if you listen carefully....
Amazing - the BEST thing in Vegas
Outstanding modernization of the original !!
Takes me back...
ick wrote:
I hear Dead People!
And dead people probably hear you..scary thought indeed. :)
Just being silly...have a nice night ick!
I hear Dead People!
And dead people probably hear you..scary thought indeed. :)
Just being silly...have a nice night ick!
justin4kick wrote:
I hear Dead People!
I hear Tame Impala!
I hear Dead People!
I've seen the "Love" show twice - it's amazing. When I go back to Las Vegas I will see it again.
It's by far the BEST thing in Las Vegas.
It's by far the BEST thing in Las Vegas.
Yes....nicely done indeed ! Gajdzin wrote:
Don't know what's better here - the performers, or the production. Fantastic mix, incredible sound.
rdo wrote:
Oasis!
Okay, Tame Oasis!
Oasis!
Okay, Tame Oasis!
rdo wrote:
Klaatu!
And if this was originally released in 2006, I'm only 19 years old. (Irony: "Paul is dead.")
Oasis!
Klaatu!
And if this was originally released in 2006, I'm only 19 years old. (Irony: "Paul is dead.")
justin4kick wrote:
Oasis!
I hear Tame Impala!
Oasis!
Everybody in my churches loves this mix...
I hear Tame Impala!
bronorb wrote:
And I did my part to take it down.
You people act like this mashup stuff is so new and creative. It has a long history starting with (who else) The Beatles! They weren't called mashups back then, but what do you think Revolution #9 is?
The songwriting credits on all of the Beatles songs were Lennon/McCartney so if you don't have BOTH of them collaborating to this project, then it's just other people screwing around with their music editing software.
meh.
This is not "just other people" man, it's George Martin - who helped the boys with much of their studio magic, and his son. And this project was kicked off by George Harrison through his friendship with the Cirque de Soleil founder, blessed by John's widow, and fully cooperated with by Paul, Ringo, Olivia & Yoka.
So lighten up on the other people crap.
Oh yeah - and this is the most creative and well down mashup on this record.
And I did my part to take it down.
You people act like this mashup stuff is so new and creative. It has a long history starting with (who else) The Beatles! They weren't called mashups back then, but what do you think Revolution #9 is?
The songwriting credits on all of the Beatles songs were Lennon/McCartney so if you don't have BOTH of them collaborating to this project, then it's just other people screwing around with their music editing software.
meh.
This is not "just other people" man, it's George Martin - who helped the boys with much of their studio magic, and his son. And this project was kicked off by George Harrison through his friendship with the Cirque de Soleil founder, blessed by John's widow, and fully cooperated with by Paul, Ringo, Olivia & Yoka.
So lighten up on the other people crap.
Oh yeah - and this is the most creative and well down mashup on this record.
Don't know what's better here - the performers, or the production. Fantastic mix, incredible sound.
Sasha2001 wrote:
You're wrong. I hope you're not also convinced ice cream gives you cancer - because, like these songs, ice cream is awesome.
Ha. I wasn't cutting the song down. I like the song. I like the Beatles. I like Ice Cream. I like you. Cancer sucks though.
Just noting that the eclectic-ness of this tune wouldn't appeal to as many listeners without 'a little help from it's friends.' :)
You're wrong. I hope you're not also convinced ice cream gives you cancer - because, like these songs, ice cream is awesome.
Ha. I wasn't cutting the song down. I like the song. I like the Beatles. I like Ice Cream. I like you. Cancer sucks though.
Just noting that the eclectic-ness of this tune wouldn't appeal to as many listeners without 'a little help from it's friends.' :)
ziakut wrote:
You're wrong. I hope you're not also convinced ice cream gives you cancer - because, like these songs, ice cream is awesome.
I'm convinced that if this didn't have 'The Beatles' headline...and was another band name unheard of...I'm sure this would rate below a paltry score of 4!
You're wrong. I hope you're not also convinced ice cream gives you cancer - because, like these songs, ice cream is awesome.
That solo in the other way around is something legendary
I'm convinced that if this didn't have 'The Beatles' headline...and was another band name unheard of...I'm sure this would rate below a paltry score of 4!
Brilliant
Byronape wrote:
I did my part to boost the rating.
And I did my part to take it down.
You people act like this mashup stuff is so new and creative. It has a long history starting with (who else) The Beatles! They weren't called mashups back then, but what do you think Revolution #9 is?
The songwriting credits on all of the Beatles songs were Lennon/McCartney so if you don't have BOTH of them collaborating to this project, then it's just other people screwing around with their music editing software.
meh.
I did my part to boost the rating.
And I did my part to take it down.
You people act like this mashup stuff is so new and creative. It has a long history starting with (who else) The Beatles! They weren't called mashups back then, but what do you think Revolution #9 is?
The songwriting credits on all of the Beatles songs were Lennon/McCartney so if you don't have BOTH of them collaborating to this project, then it's just other people screwing around with their music editing software.
meh.
I consider myself somewhat of a purist. Generally don't like remixes or covers. I was reluctant to listen to Love when it came out.
But I put on the headphones and gave it a chance after seeing a little documentary about how lovingly it was crafted and who all was involved.
Wow, I was taken by surprise. I decided to listen to it on its own merits — as I would a new album — and not compare it (as much as can be possible). And it stands on its own admirably.
I really think it's a fabulous record. It really felt like all these songs were fresh and I could adore them anew. (That being said, I have a friend who insists that without headphones one can't truly appreciate the finer nuances of these new mixes, and she may be correct in that.)
Thanks George and Giles Martin. Nicely done.
But I put on the headphones and gave it a chance after seeing a little documentary about how lovingly it was crafted and who all was involved.
Wow, I was taken by surprise. I decided to listen to it on its own merits — as I would a new album — and not compare it (as much as can be possible). And it stands on its own admirably.
I really think it's a fabulous record. It really felt like all these songs were fresh and I could adore them anew. (That being said, I have a friend who insists that without headphones one can't truly appreciate the finer nuances of these new mixes, and she may be correct in that.)
Thanks George and Giles Martin. Nicely done.
I'm in for 10...
gatorade wrote:
I did my part to boost the rating.
I'm astonished. This is only rated a 7.7? What is wrong with you people? This was and IS mind-blowing stuff here.
I did my part to boost the rating.
WYWY is George Harrison, not John.
John was never that flaky and "enigma wrapped in a conundrum coiled inside a purple tie dyed sitar".
John was never that flaky and "enigma wrapped in a conundrum coiled inside a purple tie dyed sitar".
I'm astonished. This is only rated a 7.7? What is wrong with you people? This was and IS mind-blowing stuff here.
drsteevo wrote:
And by "god" you mean John.
common misconception
And by "god" you mean John.
common misconception
This is pretty neat. The only thing that I can think of that would be even better would be to play each of the two songs separately as God intended. Thank you.
jimbaca wrote:
I saw the show and was blown away as well!
Same here. I'm not a " Vegas show" fan nor a huge Beatles fan but. . . . . the music and the show knocked my socks off. The cd has been in regular rotation at my house ever since.
I saw the show and was blown away as well!
Same here. I'm not a " Vegas show" fan nor a huge Beatles fan but. . . . . the music and the show knocked my socks off. The cd has been in regular rotation at my house ever since.
Bill, great choices this morning. One after another.
I'm surprised this is rated "only" 7.7. It's probably their most influential cut as far as expanding the musical palate of the day and features some of George's best guitar (IMHO)
I'm surprised this is rated "only" 7.7. It's probably their most influential cut as far as expanding the musical palate of the day and features some of George's best guitar (IMHO)
I loved this "Love" CD instantly and still do. #10 all around!
The DVD with 5.1 sound gets the most airtime here.
The DVD with 5.1 sound gets the most airtime here.
I'm the only person in the world who doesnt like them. I feel so alone.
Yay the show. I've got a demo from a radio programmer who shall remain nameless, and it's dismal. A remix of magic, turning it into muck (which is why said programmer surrendered it to me. He thought it was crap - and he was right.)
Why does anyone feel they can improve on the Beatles? Yes, the mixing was sometimes abyssmal, but it was the best that was available at the time. To take those works and play fast and loose with them to the tune of "Love" is, in my opinion, wrong. Got this wine-cellar, with a thousand bottles of vintage wine worth a million dollars. Oh - wait! Let's break those bottles and try to make something even better!
I've listened to the revamped music of the Beatles, and I steadfastly remain a purist. I have the originals, and as far as I'm concerned, that's all I need. This other remixed, revamped, re-done stuff is just fluff.
Why does anyone feel they can improve on the Beatles? Yes, the mixing was sometimes abyssmal, but it was the best that was available at the time. To take those works and play fast and loose with them to the tune of "Love" is, in my opinion, wrong. Got this wine-cellar, with a thousand bottles of vintage wine worth a million dollars. Oh - wait! Let's break those bottles and try to make something even better!
I've listened to the revamped music of the Beatles, and I steadfastly remain a purist. I have the originals, and as far as I'm concerned, that's all I need. This other remixed, revamped, re-done stuff is just fluff.
This is really well done. I've never heard of that "Love" performance thingy, but the soundtrack is exceptional. Long-time Beatles fan here, and I'm loving it.
jmsmy wrote:
I saw the show and was blown away as well!
Well - I just got back from Las Vegas.
I went there to see the "Love - Cirque du Soleil" show.
The few people I knew who saw it all said great things about it.
I must say it was AMAZING. It will BLOW you away.
Don't preview it or listen to the Love cd. Just GO.
I've been to Vegas before but never had a reason to go back until Love came out.
I thought I would go one last time to Vegas to check it out.
Love was so great I will be going back - maybe every year.
AMAZING
I went there to see the "Love - Cirque du Soleil" show.
The few people I knew who saw it all said great things about it.
I must say it was AMAZING. It will BLOW you away.
Don't preview it or listen to the Love cd. Just GO.
I've been to Vegas before but never had a reason to go back until Love came out.
I thought I would go one last time to Vegas to check it out.
Love was so great I will be going back - maybe every year.
AMAZING
I saw the show and was blown away as well!
dmax wrote:
George Martin differs with his son signifcantly on this issue. When asked if he prefered the "Love" album in stereo or 5.1 he replied, "mono."
Is that because he's now mostly deaf? Sorry, bad joke. I heard a great interview with Sir George on NPR, what a humble and selfless man! Amazing accident of fate that all of the differently talented people responsible for the Beatles came together for even one meeting, and a miracle that they were able to collaborate despite egos and make such high art. Not sure how I feel about these mashups, but glad it's staying in the public ear. WonderLizard wrote:
A friend just laid a copy of this on me as a house warming gift, and I have to say that—even for a Beatles purist such as me—that this belongs in every serious fan's collection. I do regret, however, that they just didn't put the CdS show on a DVD and include it with the set, for it's unlikely I'll ever be going to Las Vegas for any reason.
Sorry, doubters and trashers, but I don't see how a creative mash-up diminishes the originals in any way. In fact, I think it's pretty cool how the Martins exposed the rhythmic affinity between the two songs, something, I daresay, none of us had imagined much less observed.
A friend just laid a copy of this on me as a house warming gift, and I have to say that—even for a Beatles purist such as me—that this belongs in every serious fan's collection. I do regret, however, that they just didn't put the CdS show on a DVD and include it with the set, for it's unlikely I'll ever be going to Las Vegas for any reason.
Well - I just got back from Las Vegas.
I went there to see the "Love - Cirque du Soleil" show.
The few people I knew who saw it all said great things about it.
I must say it was AMAZING. It will BLOW you away.
Don't preview it or listen to the Love cd. Just GO.
I've been to Vegas before but never had a reason to go back until Love came out.
I thought I would go one last time to Vegas to check it out.
Love was so great I will be going back - maybe every year.
AMAZING
I went there to see the "Love - Cirque du Soleil" show.
The few people I knew who saw it all said great things about it.
I must say it was AMAZING. It will BLOW you away.
Don't preview it or listen to the Love cd. Just GO.
I've been to Vegas before but never had a reason to go back until Love came out.
I thought I would go one last time to Vegas to check it out.
Love was so great I will be going back - maybe every year.
AMAZING
What a disappointment! This is as much The Beatles as this is The Zombies.
Shimmer wrote:
I have all the old versions on CD. Is it really worth upgrading to the new masters? Is the White Album really noticeably different?
Yes and yes, especially over good earphones.
I have all the old versions on CD. Is it really worth upgrading to the new masters? Is the White Album really noticeably different?
Yes and yes, especially over good earphones.
parrothead wrote:
I have all the old versions on CD. Is it really worth upgrading to the new masters? Is the White Album really noticeably different?
It is now 2009 and just what you commented on is now available. The remasters sound great but they are not in surround. There are things on the White album that I have never heard before until now...
I have all the old versions on CD. Is it really worth upgrading to the new masters? Is the White Album really noticeably different?
I prefer each of these songs on their own.
jbtidwell wrote:
It is now 2009 and just what you commented on is now available. The remasters sound great but they are not in surround. There are things on the White album that I have never heard before until now...
I love the sonic clarity of these remixes but they've obviously been created to support a performance production (lots and lots of energy). It would really be fantastic if someone could take the same studio masters and remaster the original songs. Especially in Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround!
It is now 2009 and just what you commented on is now available. The remasters sound great but they are not in surround. There are things on the White album that I have never heard before until now...
Some one, will get parts of this fine remix for X-mas !
dmax wrote:
Sir George is one of my heroes. I have wondered what he felt about all this.
George Martin differs with his son signifcantly on this issue. When asked if he prefered the "Love" album in stereo or 5.1 he replied, "mono." 
Sir George is one of my heroes. I have wondered what he felt about all this.
Not being a "hard core" Beatles fan, my first thought was "I didn't know they did this". Speaks to the quality of the remix that my first thought wasn't "that's not the Beatles".
dmax wrote:
that Britney/OJays mash-up was awesome. Can't imagine that Bill would ever play it but it's worth tracking down.
but..but..it's two songs (at least). It's not a remix, as people keep calling it - it's a mashup. Rhythm track from one source, melody from another, other noises thrown it... I totally adore the creativity of the mashup. Good example: Blondie meets Doors for a cross of Rapture and Riders on the Storm. BEST example: Britney vs O'Jays and the mashup of "Hit Me Baby One More Time" with "Backstabbers." Brilliance.
that Britney/OJays mash-up was awesome. Can't imagine that Bill would ever play it but it's worth tracking down.
Sorry, doubters and trashers, but I don't see how a creative mash-up diminishes the originals in any way. In fact, I think it's pretty cool how the Martins exposed the rhythmic affinity between the two songs, something, I daresay, none of us had imagined much less observed.
Reserving judgment on this for now.
robbiethet wrote:
Let's say different, not better. Old and new versions both have their place. I find it energizing to hear Beatles songs in a new format. It's still the Beatles ... and had the blessing of the survivors and families.
George Martin was not the genius behind the Beatles. This seems to me a butchery. For a circus, eh? The originals are better in every way, I think. I'd give it a zero if I could. Solid "1" for now.
Let's say different, not better. Old and new versions both have their place. I find it energizing to hear Beatles songs in a new format. It's still the Beatles ... and had the blessing of the survivors and families.
George Martin was not the genius behind the Beatles. This seems to me a butchery. For a circus, eh? The originals are better in every way, I think. I'd give it a zero if I could. Solid "1" for now.
Two of my Beatles favorites.
This mix I think even further brings out the fact that these songs weren't just a few years ahead of their time... but 30 years ahead of their time.
Great stuff...
This mix I think even further brings out the fact that these songs weren't just a few years ahead of their time... but 30 years ahead of their time.
Great stuff...
Sorry haters, but I love this album. Yes, the Beatles are gods...yes their music is amazing...but this was done with George Martin's input and the survivor's OK...I find it a wonderful piece of music. I think of it as a musical "Where's Waldo?" in which you hear these snippets together and try to figure out which songs they came from. And...the sound is amazing. Love it.
NorthernLad wrote: 
Nice...
What's so great about his band anyway? Seriously.
nothing worse than a medley.
Neil Aspinall...
(click here)
EssexTex wrote:
Yeah I'm missing the original now.
me too. i got all wound up at the beginning thinking it was gonna be Tomorrow Never Knows.... and then got disappointed.
Yeah I'm missing the original now.
dmax wrote:
George Martin differs with his son signifcantly on this issue. When asked if he prefered the "Love" album in stereo or 5.1 he replied, "mono."
Thanks.
Okay. I was open to the idea at first. But after about the 100th hearing, the novelty has worn off. Go back to playing the real songs, please.
waste of airtime - this ain't no beatles song - sorry it's one step above musak
Detlaps wrote:
Why the remix? Really. Why?
Why not? Having a remix (or actually a "Mashup" correctly described in the other post) does not keep you from listening to the original if you want. GEESH. If you saw the show in person, you might feel differently. It is fantastic!! I have gone back to see it twice. And I was in 5th grade when the Beatles first appeared on Ed Sullivan so I grew up with these guys as my musical backdrop. I love getting something new made form the old awesome stuff.
7:58 am - The Beatles - Within You Without You/Tomorrow Never Knows
7:55 am - Kula Shaker - Tattva
Nice segue...
Nope. Pass. I'll take the original. Thanks. 
https://blip.tv/file/73624/
Why the remix? Really. Why?
...this is to indian music what j-pop is to american music...
I like the remixes. The transitions are fun!
annoying. i turned it up when i thought it was Tomorrow Never Knows and it turned out to be some lame-ass remixed Vegas medley package.
I love the sonic clarity of these remixes but they've obviously been created to support a performance production (lots and lots of energy). It would really be fantastic if someone could take the same studio masters and remaster the original songs. Especially in Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround!
Not as good as the originals but I don't mind hearing this remix once in a while. Pretty good to these ears.
i like it
Give me the originals. This George Martin and Co. f----ing around in the studio. Big deal.
sugarbaby wrote:
blow minus 
Maybe sugarbaby had a bad LSD experience and this song is providing a bad flashback.
Or maybe they just don't get it. Part of the experience as I remember it (of what I can remember).
Something is bothersome about this whole thing with The Beatles and Cirque du Soleil. This mix is interesting though.
wferrier wrote:
Ok what is all the Timothy Leary, Airplane, Moody Blues and wildflowers invading California really about? What's going on out there today?
Looks like Bill's trying a little musical alchemy today, due to the wildfires. I think it's working.
Ok what is all the Timothy Leary, Airplane, Moody Blues and wildflowers invading California really about? What's going on out there today?
I love the melodic line. Do they call them maqqams in Indian music as well? Anyway, the scale that is distinctly not Western.
Another stellar seque Bill!
when they pass away and it's far too late...with our LOVE we could save the world--If they only knew..outstanding lyrics
sugarbaby wrote:
blow minus
i feel confident in saying that you lack all good taste.
Very cool. This CD is outstanding.
Just got back from spending the day singing at the imagine circle. Its johnny's birthday. Sid Bernstein and some members of the plastic ono band showed up.
This is my favorite Beatles song!
...and a Muslim said it hundreds of years earlier.
Islam dates from about 600 years after Christ.