BootlegZone

Made for and by bootleg lovers
It is currently Fri Jun 05, 2020 5:11 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 511 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next
Author Message
scullyluster
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:02 am
Posts: 600
zappaf78 wrote:
I was wondering, if Revolution 9 was mentioned as being mixed live, (mono version is only the stereo mix folded into mono), when was the Revolution 1 vocal track mixed into Rev No. 9? Listen to the acetate version of Rev 9. Not even one second of the Revolution 1 track mixed in.


REVOLUTION 9 was "recorded" live on 20th June 1968 to create a "master version".

Two different stereo mixes of this "master version" were done on 21st June 1968.

An edit of "Remix Stereo 2" made the album and I'm guessing "Remix Stereo 1" is the acetate version that's been kicking about for a while. "Remix Stereo 2" includes bits of REVOLUTION 1 but the the acetate version ("Remix Stereo 1"?) does not.

We've still never heard the unmixed "master version" from 20th June so we don't know if REVOLUTION 1 was part of that initial "master version".

If REVOLUTION 1 was part of the "master version" then it must have simply have been mixed out of "Remix Stereo 1" and not mixed out of "Remix Stereo 2".

If REVOLUTION 1 was not part of the "master version" then it must have been deliberately added to "Remix Stereo 2".

Lewisohn doesn't mention when REVOLUTION 1 was added to the REVOLUTION 9 mix but it must have been during either of those two sessions. The only way of clarifying it would be to listen to the unmixed "master version" from 20th June and see if it's on there.

My guess is that John felt "Remix Stereo 1" wasn't good enough and needed something more so he pulled the tape of REVOLUTION 1 out and added that in to "Remix Stereo 2". But that's just a guess.


Top
 Profile  
 
peerke
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 7:32 am
Posts: 616
Location: Belgium
I was wondering: is it pure coincidence that this take appears just a few weeks after Paul accidentally (?) dropping that he would want to release his Beatles avant-garde track 'Carnival Of Light'?

_________________
"Picking up scales and broken chords / Puppy-dog tails in the House of Lords / Tell me darling, what can it mean?"


Top
 Profile  
 
peterchadwick
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:31 pm
Posts: 183
Location: Leeds, U.K.
peerke wrote:
I was wondering: is it pure coincidence that this take appears just a few weeks after Paul accidentally (?) dropping that he would want to release his Beatles avant-garde track 'Carnival Of Light'?




Yes.

_________________
Wherever you go, there you are


Top
 Profile  
 
TheLazenby
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 12:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:33 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Since I'm putting together that "Making of Revolution" compilation, I've been listening to the Yoko tape straight through (for the first time) picking out things to use... interesting stuff.

Really and insight into how Yoko's brain worked, 40 years ago at least. She seems very paranoid and uncomfortable, at one point thinking John's mad at her with no clear reason. She seems to wander back and forth between the control room and the studio watching, but being too afraid to get close. Sort of a fascinating look at someone suddenly thrust into the middle of a steadily breaking machine.

_________________
I'm on Twitter!! http://www.twitter.com/MagentaWig


Top
 Profile  
 
reedpigman
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 11:25 pm
Posts: 671
The music writers for the Washington Post rarely mention bootlegs and they certainly never review them - until today. In the Post's singles column ("a weekly playlist for the listener with a one-track mind") today there's this:
Quote:
The Beatles: "Revolution 1 (Take 20)" This newly surfaced, extended "White Album" outtake is reportedly the missing link between the conventional, now-familiar "Revolution 1" and its far-out cousin, the soundscape "Revolution 9." Questions abound about the track's origin, but its buzz-killing Yoko Ono spoken word interlude is a depressing indicator of authenticity.

Other singles reviewed include:
Doom: "Cellz"
Mastodon: "The Czar"
Previously on Lost: "Out of Arms Way"
João Brasil: "Orgasmadance" (a mash up)


Top
 Profile  
 
phatt
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:13 am
Posts: 58
Location: NH, USA
TheLazenby wrote:
Since I'm putting together that "Making of Revolution" compilation, I've been listening to the Yoko tape straight through (for the first time) picking out things to use... interesting stuff.


See you in the funny farm....


- phatt 8)

_________________
http://phattbuzz.podomatic.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Beatle Bob
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2002 3:47 pm
Posts: 4662
Location: Stoogeville, Moronica
A good friend of mine who lives in Albany, NY, reported to me last week, he heard the track on the radio!

Regards,
Beatle Bob
:)

_________________
"Broadsword calling Danny Boy, over."


Top
 Profile  
 
trevmds
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 6:27 am
Posts: 386
OK everyone, I know you're all probably a bit Revolutioned-out by now, but I've finally finished my mix. Running to twelve minutes, in glorious stereo, using five separate sources all synched together, I call it the Revolution "Kitchen Synch" mix, and I humbly present it to you all!


http://www.brilton.net/html/i/beatles_r ... n_1-9.html


Top
 Profile  
 
SlvrHmrM
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 5:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 5:21 am
Posts: 507
That was cool, thanks for uploading. It's reminiscent of how I Am The Walrus descends into chaos at the end, just more extended this time. I think there are some interesting parallels between the two, and this mix points that out.


Top
 Profile  
 
TheLazenby
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:33 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
trevmds, you should try adding "Revolution" (single) over that. You'd have to loop it (like "Revolucination" on Tuned to a Natural E) but it'd sound cool...

As it stands though, your mix is TRULY insane. :-)

_________________
I'm on Twitter!! http://www.twitter.com/MagentaWig


Top
 Profile  
 
Ken Wood
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:50 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2002 8:46 pm
Posts: 10521
Location: Germany
Really enjoyed the "Kitchen Synch" one (great name too!). It`s fun to hear (if you are a bit grazy), even though it`s not a reconstruction in the way of showcasing what it once sounded like - rather (if I got the idea right) what it could have sounded like if they left all elements in and together that existed in different layers at the same time.

_________________
The Come Together Project needs YOU!
Please provide needed audio sources (EAC`s of original CDs, etc.)
as well as photos and liner notes for artwork!


Top
 Profile  
 
trevmds
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 6:27 am
Posts: 386
Ken Wood wrote:
Really enjoyed the "Kitchen Synch" one (great name too!). It`s fun to hear (if you are a bit grazy), even though it`s not a reconstruction in the way of showcasing what it once sounded like - rather (if I got the idea right) what it could have sounded like if they left all elements in and together that existed in different layers at the same time.



It's my interpretation of Lewishon's erroneous statement about the back half of Revolution 1 becoming Revolution 9. Also it's to highlight where Lennon's "all right" vocals come in during revolution 9, and to synch the band behind those bits.

It's also a Manichean struggle between Chaos and Order (and guess which one wins?)


Top
 Profile  
 
Ken Wood
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:31 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2002 8:46 pm
Posts: 10521
Location: Germany
scullyluster wrote:
Two different stereo mixes of this "master version" were done on 21st June 1968.
An edit of "Remix Stereo 2" made the album and I'm guessing "Remix Stereo 1" is the acetate version that's been kicking about for a while.

IIRC John Winn states (or assumes) in TMF that the acetate version is NOT a mono copy of "Remix Stereo 1" but a rough mono mix.

_________________
The Come Together Project needs YOU!
Please provide needed audio sources (EAC`s of original CDs, etc.)
as well as photos and liner notes for artwork!


Top
 Profile  
 
Doc
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 12:54 pm
Posts: 418
trevmds wrote:
OK everyone, I know you're all probably a bit Revolutioned-out by now, but I've finally finished my mix. Running to twelve minutes, in glorious stereo, using five separate sources all synched together, I call it the Revolution "Kitchen Synch" mix, and I humbly present it to you all!


http://www.brilton.net/html/i/beatles_r ... n_1-9.html



BRILLIANT!! :hap:
Doc


Top
 Profile  
 
TheLazenby
 Post subject: Revolution 1 - what was take 21??
PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 7:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:33 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
I'm curious, for those of you with Lewisohn's book... what was Revolution 1 Take 21?

We know that take 20 was the 10:17 take, and take 22 is what is on the White Album (no long ending, new overdubs)... what's in the middle? Is take 21 the basis of take 22 before the electric guitar & horn overdubs??

_________________
I'm on Twitter!! http://www.twitter.com/MagentaWig


Top
 Profile  
 
DinsdaleP
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:09 am
Posts: 1483
Take 21 was just an unused reduction of take 20.

- John

_________________
http://www.multiplusbooks.com


Top
 Profile  
 
TheLazenby
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 5:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:33 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
I'm a bit confused over what the title "Revolution #2" is supposed to refer to. I've heard this used to refer to three takes of a jam around the Revolution 1 riff (on some versions of "From Kinfauns To Chaos" - others call the song "Revolution Jam"), but I've also heard it used to refer to the single version.

Did the Beatles actually ever refer to the single version as "Revolution 2"??

_________________
I'm on Twitter!! http://www.twitter.com/MagentaWig


Top
 Profile  
 
TheLazenby
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 7:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:33 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Does anyone know why the album version of "Revolution 9" is labeled as 'take 18'?

John said in the interview I dug up for "FCTR" that he only put together "Revolution 9" TWICE - which most likely means the rough mix (RS1, without the Revolution 1 noises) and the White Album mix (RS2).

_________________
I'm on Twitter!! http://www.twitter.com/MagentaWig


Top
 Profile  
 
Beatlefreak
 Post subject: Revolution Take 20 RM1 - geuine take or fake?
PostPosted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:34 pm
Posts: 542
Recently there have come up two new intersting songs: Take 5 of Come And Get It and Revolution Take 20 RM1.

I recently downloaded Revolution Take 20 RM1 from a swedish website. The song is said to been released by Purple Chick, however a friend of mine recently bought a CD by Gema with this song as a bonustrack. When comparing the two version we discovered many differencies. For one thing, the Revolution Take 20 RM1 is more than 10 min long, when the version released by Gema is about 4 min long.

So, can someone tell me if the Revolution Take 20 RM1 released through Purple Chick actually is a genuine Beatles track or an outfake?


Top
 Profile  
 
TheLazenby
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:33 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Take 20 RM1 is absolutely genuine.

Download a boot of the Revolution sessions (like my "From Chaos To Evolution" perhaps?!) and you'll hear John in the studio creating that high "aaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh!" loop that runs throughout it.

_________________
I'm on Twitter!! http://www.twitter.com/MagentaWig


Top
 Profile  
 
Beatlefreak
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 3:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:34 pm
Posts: 542
I do have the "From Kinfaus To Chaos" cd from Vigotone. So you say I will find parts from take 20 RM1 on the "Chaos" cd?


Top
 Profile  
 
TheLazenby
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 5:33 pm
Posts: 2973
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Yes... in fact, much of the "Chaos" disc proves the legitimacy of RM1. Not only do you hear the extended ending multiple times (without the high, droning overdub), but towards the end of the disc, you actually hear John playing that loop out loud and discussing how to add it to the track. As the Yoko diary tape ends, you actually hear the announcement of "Revolution RM1 of take...." followed by the first two minutes of what ended up being the recently discovered 10-minute version.

_________________
I'm on Twitter!! http://www.twitter.com/MagentaWig


Top
 Profile  
 
TJT
 Post subject: Re: Revolution
PostPosted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2002 4:58 am
Posts: 7980
Location: Away in the Mind, beyond the finite, lives another Magician...
thanks to Robin for posting this article elsewhere.

Quote:
The bridge between 'Revolution' 1 and 9
by Matt Rosoff

cnet_news406: http%3A%2F% 2Fnews.cnet. com%2F8301- 13526_3-10207169 -27.html

Every one of them knew that as time went by, they'd get a little bit older and a little bit slower.
This news is over a month old, but somehow I missed it until the intrepid Penn Jillette tweeted about it Sunday (never say Twitter's useless). Here's the scene: Beatles. 1968. That'd be the long-hair bearded Beatles. "White Album" recording session. John's recording a slowed-down version of their recent hit single "Revolution, " the B-side to the umpteen-million selling "Hey Jude." Being in a particular state of mind, he stretches it out for 10 minutes, then adds some scary horror music plus Yoko spoken-word weirdness at the end. Later, John or the rest of the band or George Martin or other mysterious powers decide that they'll add some overdubs to John's take and cut it off after about four minutes and record a new ending. (I believe the weird triple hit after the last chorus--every other time, it's a double hit--signals the beginning of the new end.) That's "Revolution 1." Then, John will add his own nine-minute musique concrete freakout to the end of
the album. He uses some of the bits from the end of the old "Revolution 1." That becomes "Revolution 9," perhaps the most-skipped song of the CD era.
A month ago, somebody leaked the original track, which to "White Album" fans, comprises a sort of holy grail connecting the two Revolutions, which otherwise bear no similarity except their names. EMI has been issuing takedown notices as fast as it can, but as of 10 a.m. Monday you could still hear it on YouTube, and download it (right click-save as) from a source called Rawkblog.net. I'm purposely not linking to either source to give this remarkable track a bit more life, but google "Revolution 1 Take 20," then click on the YouTube and Rawkblog.net links and you'll get it. (Warning: some of the other links to the download connect you to pop-up-infested sites that may make your computer very unhappy.)
Now if somebody would just leak the seven-hour version of "Helter Skelter"...
Matt Rosoff is an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, where he covers Microsoft's consumer products and corporate news. He's written about the technology industry since 1995, and reviewed the first Rio MP3 player for CNET.com in 1998. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network. Disclosure.


Top
 Profile  
 
gabriel
 Post subject: Revolution (Before and After Reduction mixes)
PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 5:57 pm
Posts: 170
I've been listening to Revolution (single version) and can someone tell me if this is what the song looked like before and after each reduction mix.


Take 10:
Track 1 - John's Guitar
Track 2 - George's Guitar
Track 3 - Drums
Track 4 - 2nd Drum Overdub and Handclaps

Take 13:
Track 1 - Reduction of Take 10 Tracks 1 & 2 (Guitars)
Track 2 - Reduction of Take 10 Track 3 & 4 (Drums)
Track 3 - Lead Vocal
Track 4 - 2nd Lead Vocal

Take 15:
Track 1 - Same as Above
Track 2 - Same as Above
Track 3 - Reduction of Take 13 Tracks 3 & 4 (Lead Vocals)
Track 4 - Nicky Hopkin's Piano and Lead Guitar Solo

Take 16:
Track 1 - Same as Above
Track 2 - Same as Above
Track 3 - Reduction of Take 15 Tracks 3 & 4 (Vocals and Piano and Guitar Solo)
Track 4 - Bass

Winn says the Lead Guitar for the solo and final chorus was overdubbed onto Take 16 on the same track as the bass. This is impossible however, because the guitar suddenly fades in during the final chorus, while the bass is consistely there. It must be on the same track as the piano, because both only appear during the instrumental break and final chorus, and are faded in at points. They must have been faded in and out during the Take 15 to Take 16 Reduction. Does Anyone agree? What does RTB (Recording the Beatles) say?

Gabriel


Top
 Profile  
 
beatlesondvd
 Post subject: "Revolution 1", take... 2?
PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 4:20 pm
Posts: 814
Location: Paris, France
Why does the engineer (Geoff Emerick?) say "Alright, take 2" at the start of Revolution 1 on the album (just before John's "Okay?"), when the basic track used for the commercial release was take 18? Or am I mishearing that?

_________________
http://www.beatlesondvd.com/
http://www.beatlesondvd.com/stonesondvd/
http://www.beatlesarchives.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 511 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AdamBound1, alphabeatles2, Ants, bri286, Google [Bot], hinrichschroeder, lbrow65, mikecarrera03, MoJo and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group