Cover songs: Should people even try?

Hi Sara.

I certainly support your 10 bad ones for every viable cover ratio, but I think overall I disagree. I feel like covers can be great in a couple of different ways. It mainly depends on the quality of the artist doing the cover and how they go about it. I guess there is a time and a place. It is also important to remember that one person's trash is another's treasure.

All in all, I think covers can be a great tool, but here are the rules as I see them. You should only be allowed to do a verbatim cover live! A live cover of a song is an homage, a recorded version of that verbatim cover is cashing in on another person's song (I'm looking at you Smashmouth you stupid hacks, and just because you sing it like a douche bag doesn't mean you've changed it either). You can record a cover for a record if you change the vibe of it to "make it your own" because in doing so you have added your creative input to it, but you should never pawn off a track of the singer practically doing karaoke while taking advantage of modern production tools to accentuate the production and put it on your album... Gwen Stefani, you hack.

I think you can cover a song of initial brilliance, but you do so at extreme risk to your own reputation. I saw a band, a decent local pop punk band opening for someone a while back. They were alright, not really my cup of tea, but they had the audience going and they were ok. Then, all of a sudden I hear "this isn't our song" and here comes a really crappy version of Smells Like Teen Spirit. Not only did they butcher one of the most recognizable songs of our times, but in a matter of 3 minutes or so lost the whole audience. A bad cover of a beloved song can ruin your credibility, but can also gain you a ton of points if you pull it off. You'll most likely lose the purists as a given, but I would say that the gain is equal to the loss because you gain from the popularity of the song. The more brilliant and/or recognizable the song is directly perportionate to the quality it demands. I always point to Stevie Wonder's cover of We Can Work It Out. Amazing cover of an amazing tune.

Live, a cover can just be a really fun way to connect with your audience, or the way I prefer it, throw them a curveball. Right now the band I'm in is hashing out a version of Joe Jackson's Steppin Out, and the best one I've ever been a part of (selection wise) Not In Nottingham from the Disney cartoon version of Robin Hood are examples of this. Do a neat version of a song that people may know and enjoy, but wouldn't expect to hear from you. It gives the audience a small window into the person you are in a way based on the choice you make. A small look into maybe your cd case or into your practice space. It's also a great way to just stick something cool into the set. I've also always wanted to do I Want A New Drug by Huey Lewis and the News.

I guess in general I think people should think really long and hard about putting any cover on a release that isn't a tribute album, and I think I've liked about 2 out of about 100 tribute albums that I've heard.

**************

Happy Monday everybody by the way.

Hi Sookie, Hi Sara. Great to see you guys.

Hi Mr. Bernstein. I totally agree, and that Tori Amos Zep cover is a great example of it. Great version, and a great example of someone taking a really great song and leaving their own special mark on it.

***************

Hey man. That sucks, I shot it out on the day you sent your address over. I think I missed the mail that day by getting it in the box too late, but I was figuring it would have definitely arrived by now. If you want, I'll turn my e-mail back on (I don't have the e-mail anymore) and if you send your address over again I'll send another one out. Sorry about that.

1. For the most part, I do not like them. And I have heard covers that were amazing, but very few have surpassed the original, in my opinion. I would say that about 97% of the time I like the original better.

2. I believe that a band can cover a brilliant song and still sound okay with it, but all of the covers I have heard of brilliant songs just pale so much in comparison. So, I think they can be attempted, but I think that it would be very hard to make a good cover of a brilliant song. Everyone would be comparing it to the original.

3. I prefer that they put a whole new spin on it. I mean, if I want to listen to something that sounds like the original, I might as well just go listen to the original. I like to listen to a different take on the song if I am going to listen to a cover. I like to hear something new. I do not necessarily think that that is the only way it should be done, but I find it preferable...

1. Some are okay.. but some are really really really awful. For example: Fall Out Boy's cover of Pantera's "Walk". That was just disgraceful.

2. No, I think if a band is going to cover a song, it should be because the song means a lot to all/any members of the band, not just because it was a big hit the first time round.

3. I think that 'putting a whole new spin on it' it kinda defeating the whole object of covering a song. Yeah, I don't mind it sounding a LITTLE bit different but making it not sound like the original at all could just be classed as stealing lyrics.

Hi there, Balloon! Long time no see!

1) It depends on the song. For example, I love Orgy's cover of "Blue Monday" and Soft Cell's cover of "Tainted Love". Pantera and Slayer both brilliantly covered Black Sabbath on "Nativity in Black II: A Tribute to Black Sabbath".

On the other hand, Metallica's cover of "Astronomy" was ruined by James' terrible vocals and Lars' weakened drumming. Britney Spears should never be allowed to cover another song. The Cure turned Jimi Hendrix's "Purple Haze" into a joke.

2) Some songs or bands should never be covered. The only band I have ever heard properly cover Pink Floyd is Dream Theater. I would hate to hear anyone try to cover The Doors and Queensrÿche.

3) Again, it depends on the song and original and covering artists. When I play live, the band I play with most often plays cover songs simply because it's a passionate hobby for all of us. When I play a guitar solo, I almost never play a guitar solo the same way as the original artist. That's my way of paying tribute to the original guitarist.

interesting question.

1. i'm pretty ambivalent. sometimes, covers can be really cool, but many other times, they suck. really, really suck. like you said. some bands are very difficult to cover, such as nirvana, and when you do cover them, it often sounds 'wrong'.

2. should they even be attempted a second time...well, that's up to the artist, i suppose. it's a risk, of course...there are always going to be good covers, somewhere out there. i don't think that there should be any kind of absolute on this sort of thing.

3. eh....some covers are cool if you put a whole new twist on it, such as the rock remake of the techno dance song 'stars' done by lacuna coil. but i wouldn't go so far as to say that you HAVE to make a song completely different for it to be a cover.

you get a star, though!

Agreed, Sarah...sometimes you have to dig through a pile of trash to get to a really great cover.

1. I dig them. A lot.

2. I'm on the fence about this one. Some bands try to make their covers of classics better than the originals and they fall flat on their faces.

3. I look at covers as being, in many cases, an homage to the original. I would like to see something new brought to the song, but while still acknowledging the original. Making it different just for the sake of making it different can sometimes miss the mark as far as I'm concerned.

Edit: (((((Sarah))))) It's so good to see you...I've missed you!

Happy Monday, Prof!

Cover song reduxs can be a tricky business. Reduxs should be done with a well balanced mix of sounding like the original, with due respect to the original band/artist, and with a refreshing twist of new sound.

I've heard some Beatles reduxs that actually fit this bill:

Cheap Trick: "Magical Mystery Tour". Cheap Trick was ballsy enough to even attempt a redux of this timeless classic---and they impressively pulled it off!!! McCartney, who heard the redux was quite impressed (albeit true he no longer owned the song rights).

Kansas also did a fantastic Beatles cover of "Eleanor Rigby" with a clear resonance of powerful clarity the Beatles only wish was available when the song was first made.

The late Jeff Healey did an awesome redux of "While My Guitar Gently Weeps". However, attempts made by Peter Frampton and Yes fall short of the mark. The worst ever redux of this song goes to Pearl Jam.

DEVO did a quirky redux of The Stone's "Satisfaction", which was totally out of the box--but one worth a listen to. Hey, Mick Jagger LIKED it!!!

Billy Idol's energetic remake of "Mony Mony" was on-target and a prime example of what I'm talking about.

So if a band does a song redux--make it one with respectful sound hints of the original work--but do throw in a hint of your own sound.

Hey

I enjoy mane covers a lot. Just think about the wonderful covers Manfred Mann's Earthband did of several good songs.

Absolutely! Even if something is brilliant it can inspire a band or a musician and it is OK to try and make a personal interpretation.

It all depends on the band. But for me it is definitely more interesting to hear a new and different spin as you call it.

1. Negrodamus' likes cover songs when they're done right.

2. Attempted? Yes. But one has to be realistic with the results. Britney Spears covering Satisfaction from the Stones makes me want to cut my ears off.

3. Perhaps putting a new spin on an old song is too much sometimes. There's usually only so much one can do to make someone else's song your own before it becomes something it probably shouldn't be.

1) i feel that it should be done right. note for note, rhythm for rhythm. it should be done exactly how the original was because original seldom have better cover songs. one example of a cover song sounding better than the original is marvin gay's cover of "i've heard it through the grape vine."

2) if the original is brilliant why go back and screw it up. "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

3) if it sounds better than the original but if it sounds completely different then people might not know what the heck they're listening to.

I hear ya!!!

1) Sometimes I like the covers (about 1 in 10)

2) Yeah... I like it when bands try to cover others that have influenced them in some way (example- Dinosaur Jr doing "Just Like Heaven" by The Cure)...

3) No... I don't always believe that a new spin on a cover is necessary. The Cranberries did a great cover of "Go Your Own Way" by Fleetwood Mac...