Is 'Let It Be film restored' once again a broken promise?

Discuss official releases and re-issues. The only links allowed here are to the Beatles YouTube channel or other band-sanctioned platforms.
sam004
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2021 10:57 pm
Location: US
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Is 'Let It Be film restored' once again a broken promise?

Post by sam004 »

As I am sure all of us have visited The Daily Beatle, thought it would be fitting to include as a reference.

Being the fan that PJ is, I wonder if he didn't make a version for himself ?
I recall him telling the story of how he wanted a VHS back in the day and finally
bought a VHS copy years later but has nothing to play it on.

He also has either photos or stills from the February sessions.


https://webgrafikk.com/blog/documentary/let-it-be/
User avatar
Lord Reith
Posts: 4602
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:22 am
Location: BBC House
Has thanked: 139 times
Been thanked: 3965 times

Re: Is 'Let It Be film restored' once again a broken promise?

Post by Lord Reith »

They scanned all the film from the sessions. These days, once film is digitized then an AI computer program can rebuild a movie or tv from scratch in HD using the raw footage. It analyses the original version (in this case the 16mm LIB movie) and then uses image recognition to scan through all the raw footage and select the exact right scene, and thus is able to build up the entire thing in perfect quality. Many tv shows from the 80s/90s that were shot on film but edited on videotape have been rebuilt in HD using this automatic process (Buffy being one i think). Prior to this, it was left to some mug to do it manually (which must have been horrific... they did Star Trek TNG that way).

Even though there's a lot of footage, it'd only take an hour or two for the software to rebuild Let It Be exactly as it was, but in better quality. Piece of cake. Record a commentary and mix the sound. Bluray by Christmas. But will it happen? That is the $29.95 question.
Women there don't treat you mean, in Abilene
skynet
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:35 pm
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Is 'Let It Be film restored' once again a broken promise?

Post by skynet »

millerTEK wrote: Sun Mar 19, 2023 3:54 am ... So regarding your audio comment - they didn't have surround sound back then like they do today. I have all of the original US, Laserdisc, etc releases and they are not in surround or even stereo. REMEMBER - the audio source for the video was NAGRA and in mono. Even Peter Jackson with today's technology - had the mono source to work with as well...he expanded that mono audio to 7.1 surround, but really if you listen carefully, it is just echo and some bass/treble separations for those channels. So that 7.1 surround is not discrete channels, but each and signal bouncing...
I guess i should have been more clear on my original comment, so let me try to be more specific:

I was referring to the specific segment on "Some Other Guy" in the Blu-Ray 7.1 Mix because the EQ and separation is far better, even if the rear channels are just bouncing, what i did mention was in reference, say, to the center part of this mix in particular, PJ team did a great work with their separation software, and the difference is really noticed in this "main section" (Left/right/center and LFE signals in the mix), they have a good use of this, the guitars sounds really sharp, clear and raw at the same time, while the bass shines through the LFE (my MX180 picked those up really nice). this is different in the Dolby Atmos Mix, which segments like the one i mentioned even sounds fake/less natural (so to speak), the rest, ok, given what is available is a nice work nevertheless

I know that by design most everything pre-65, let alone the early recordings, can't be mixed in 5.1, 7.1 or Dolby Atmos and making any justice to them, because the recording technics at the time make it more difficult and were not designed originally like that, so we take what exist

millerTEK wrote: Sun Mar 19, 2023 3:54 am Now, let's look at the Furmanek audio and video remixing...he too used technology that existing back then (not as advanced as what PJ got to use!). His Video remastering was limited to what existed back then...and though His AUDIO remixing to Stereo definitely was nice - you also have to consider another audio source HE HAD as well. When the Beatles moved to Apple - though the NAGRA audio was still mono - we know SOME ITEMS were recorded in multitrack by Glyn Johns. He might have had access to those sources to help his stereo remixing as well.
... The only thing i can answer to this is reiterate that i have never been a fan of Furmanek mixes, even considering the tech limitations he have at the time, for just to put it simple, his work sound really artificial -need to reiterate: to ME-, some of it sounds ok, some of it just don't , but in this particular part, and paraphrasing: "sound depends on the listener experience" so you may like his work, is fine by me, i respect you like it :)... but is not my cup of tea
Post Reply