Let It Be... Naked

  • Record Label:
  • Release Date:
Let It Be... Naked Image
Metascore
68

Generally favorable reviews - based on 17 Critics What's this?

User Score
8.2

Universal acclaim- based on 72 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Originally intended as a loose, spontaneous recording called 'Get Back,' 'Let It Be' was eventually released (after the band's breakup) after being shelved and then reproduced/enhanced by Phil Spector, leaving many fans (and an angry Paul McCartney) wondering, "what if?" This new releaseOriginally intended as a loose, spontaneous recording called 'Get Back,' 'Let It Be' was eventually released (after the band's breakup) after being shelved and then reproduced/enhanced by Phil Spector, leaving many fans (and an angry Paul McCartney) wondering, "what if?" This new release answers that question to a certain extent, with an altered track listing (which adds "Don't Let Me Down") containing some de-Spectorized versions as well as some originals that have been remixed and remastered. Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 17
  2. Negative: 0 out of 17
  1. Mojo
    100
    The cleaning up, editing and resequencing has brought out a warmth and depth of colour we've not heard before and allows the album to stand up to scrutiny next to modern records that aim for this kind of down-homeness and simplicity. [Dec 2003, p.134]
  2. Entertainment Weekly
    83
    Both eye-opening and questionable. [21 Nov 2003, p.81]
  3. Blender
    80
    Let It Be... Naked offers an experience its predecessor never could. [Dec 2003, p.154]
  4. The casual fan could do just as well building his own sequence from the 1970 original, Naked and the third Anthology disc.
  5. Casual fans, however, will wonder what all the fuss was about; novices should still get the original.
  6. Putting Naked together was likely satisfying for McCartney, but like a lot of inherently selfish artistic endeavors, it’s somewhat less rewarding for everyone else.
  7. Q Magazine
    40
    Mercifully, the original Let It Be remains on sale. [Dec 2003, p.146]

See all 17 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 32 out of 42
  2. Negative: 5 out of 42
  1. PaulTheMan
    May 11, 2006
    10
    Whoever says that the beatles are overated should not even vote. I love this album because its raw, Phil Spector was the one who added all Whoever says that the beatles are overated should not even vote. I love this album because its raw, Phil Spector was the one who added all the stuff in the original album, so Let it Be naked is what the Beatles would want the album to be. And Sam D doesn't know what he/she is talking about. Creative bands have creativity, their not just on drugs all the damn time. You need to get a lesson in creativity. Expand
  2. PrestonJ
    Feb 19, 2007
    10
    People have missed the point of the album... which was to give us what the beatles intended for release to the masses, not what the studio People have missed the point of the album... which was to give us what the beatles intended for release to the masses, not what the studio and Label added to already perfect songs... This album is the epitome of everything beatles... Clean flawless LIVE recordings that pushed the bounds of what people thought was possible with music at the time... Expand
  3. Feb 1, 2016
    10
    Vocals are clearer, Harrison's guitars included, drums sound amazing. The whole thing feels warm and real. I have always felt that Spector'sVocals are clearer, Harrison's guitars included, drums sound amazing. The whole thing feels warm and real. I have always felt that Spector's take sounded like a bootleg on steroids. Now I can actually hear the Beatles. Paul was right from the beginning. Expand
  4. JanineP
    Jun 16, 2004
    9
    I really love this album. It sounds so perfect retouched and I can almost imagine the boys standing in front of me playing. Now Let It Be is I really love this album. It sounds so perfect retouched and I can almost imagine the boys standing in front of me playing. Now Let It Be is one of my fave albums. Expand
  5. G
    Dec 10, 2008
    8
    An excellent redefinition of Let it Be. Essential for musicians and hardcore Beatles fans, but adding almost nothing, in terms of historical An excellent redefinition of Let it Be. Essential for musicians and hardcore Beatles fans, but adding almost nothing, in terms of historical contribution, to the original Let it Be. The musical and deep concept of the original album is still there, but the minor, but important, modifications on The Long, Across and in the overral mixing and mastering (the major problem in the orginal - poor Spector...), brings a new whole idea of Beatles tunes, instrumental & technical approaches, clean vocals, sunny harmonies and even a fresh sense of continuity. Still a 9! Come on lame critics, give it a chance... ps: The second disc? Pure waste of time. Expand
  6. PaulF
    Nov 20, 2003
    7
    Not quite as advertized. Still contains many "Specterized" elements, most notably the opening to "I Dig a Pony". Too many crossfades on the Not quite as advertized. Still contains many "Specterized" elements, most notably the opening to "I Dig a Pony". Too many crossfades on the second disk and they cut away from the music too quickly (we are teased with openings of "Child of Nature" and "All Things Must Pass", only to have them quickly faded out.) And why is the second disk a single 20 minute track? Having now heard the original version of this album, as well as this remixed attempt, as well as the many takes from Anthology 3 and the Glyn Johns edit (available by import) to say nothing of the many bootlegs available, I'm starting to find the many versions of these songs as tedious as George and John did in 1969. Expand
  7. JonH
    Jun 7, 2004
    0
    this isn't the real let it be at all, it's just what paul wanted, and it doesn't come close to the original.

See all 42 User Reviews