Did Long and Winding Road really come out before The Beatles' version? We currently have the album as released in March 1970, whereas The Beatles' version was not released until May that year.
Yes, it seems that way. I've checked the dates and they are rock solid.
Also the song 'Let It Be' itself was close, issued as a single on 6 March in the UK - the Bud Shank album was reviewed 14 March in Billboard.
As most of us know, the 'Let It Be' album was recorded before 'Abbey Road' that appeared in Sept 1969. Interestingly, the original 'Long and Winding Road' could have been issued by Tom Jones, he declined the offer from Paul to make it his next single, but his company (Decca, AGAIN?) held on to 'Without Love', a single that charted early December 1969.
Obviously, Bud Shank had access to the then unissued January 1969 Beatles recordings.
I'm mentioning Jon baggish here, as he may have more to add...
I had a look around and didn't find much worthwhile to add. Walt has summarised it pretty well. As well as Tom Jones, the book "Revolution in the Head" says demos were sent to Cilla Black and others so perhaps it was known, but of course that doesn't account for Bud Shank getting "Let It Be" as well. He had already covered several other Beatles tracks of course and was pretty quick off the mark with the "Magical Mystery Tour" material. (Tom Jones' "Without Love" reached no.5 in the US I think so it wasn't a total loss for him.)
______
Really wild, General!
As well as Tom Jones, the book "Revolution in the Head" says demos were sent to Cilla Black and others so perhaps it was known, but of course that doesn't account for Bud Shank getting "Let It Be" as well.
That’s what I find hard to believe. But based on the evidence that walt has checked, it sounds like we should indeed mark Shank’s version of Long and Winding Road as the first release. Puzzling.
Yep, seems so. I asked a question on the Hoffman forum, let's see if I get any replies. Well, Aretha Franklin had already released "Let It Be" in January, so perhaps that one is less mysterious.
______
Really wild, General!
Well, Aretha Franklin had already released "Let It Be" in January, so perhaps that one is less mysterious.
Wow! I didn't know that...
I sent an email to the host of a "Brunch with the Beatles" show that airs weekly on the local Oldies station as well. Hopefully he'll be able to help clear things up too.
Member
Posts: 2
Hi - I'm Mark Elliott - I host a Beatles show that airs on WDJO in Cincinnati (must be where Oldiesmann listens). He emailed me (as mentioned above).
This is an interesting subject and a look at songs/releases I had never thought of. First the facts - "Let It Be" - the Beatles album containing The Long and Winding Road was recorded mostly in 1969 (the song "Let It Be" recorded in Jan 1970) but was released much later, on May 8, 1970. I can't find an actual release date on the Bud Shank album (Let It Be, Bud Shank With The Bob Alcivar Singers) but from the records of the Pacific Jazz label, it was the fourth album released that year (1970) by the label. (http://www.jazzlists.com/SJ_Label_Pacific_Jazz_10100.htm) There were a number of Beatles songs on the Shank album, as noted. If in fact, the album was released in March as was claimed it would have been the FIRST release of a recording of the song.
However, I'm really not sure how that matters. Jazz artists like Bud Shank were reduced to mostly backup players during the late 60's and early 70's. (He's best known in the rock world as playing the flute solo on California Dreaming by the Mamas and Papas.) Session players heard a lot of stuff that was recorded but never released. And lots of artists were doing Beatles covers just because that's how hot The Beatles were. Does the earlier "release" date somehow make Bud Shank's the original and Beatles the cover version? I don't think you can make that argument. But if the release date matters, Bud was first I guess.
Thanks Oldiesmann for inviting me in. We did a "Beatles Under Cover" show a few weeks ago - I'll add a Bud Shank version when the show reairs this summer.
Does the earlier "release" date somehow make Bud Shank's the original and Beatles the cover version? I don't think you can make that argument. But if the release date matters, Bud was first I guess.
Great to hear from you Mark Elliott . For our purposes, both release and recording dates do indeed determine which performances were the originals. It’s puzzling that Shanks was able to release his version before The Beatles though.
It’s puzzling that Shanks was able to release his version before The Beatles though.
That was my thought. I would have guessed that session musicians would have been required to sign some confidentiality agreement as part of their contract when hired, including specific restrictions on releasing their own versions of the works they encounter during the sessions.
Perhaps not then, but I would be shocked if not standard today.
Member
Posts: 2
I'm certainly not a music industry expert, but once a song is "published" the melody and lyrics are in control of the publisher not the artist or songwriter. I'm sure the plan was to release the song not long after they recorded it in 1969, so I'm sure it was published. Here's some background data about how songs are licensed by their publishers.
https://www.makeitinmusic.com/licence-cover-song/
https://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2009/jun/18/behind-music-cover-versi…
