Remaining faithful to the originals

Bass_Bear · #1 01-26-2009, 11:02 AM

So here I am learning a new song the band I jam with plans to cover, for those of you who are curious out there, Ziggy Stardust by David Bowie. So I've got the chords down, as well as most of the bassline. Here is my question, not for lack of being able to perform it physically, but I wanna know what you guys think of whether or not its important to be as faithful as possible to the original bassline?

Now don't get me wrong, Gail Ann Dorsay is incredible at playing her part, in fact I'm surprised no one mentions her more than this but....oh wait where was I? Oh yeah, what I'm trying to ask here is whether or not you gigging vets and you basement bassists think its okay to diverge from the original line, all the while staying within the song and keeping the groove. Lemme know what you guys think.

Cheers,
J

PS - Is this is the right section? General Instruction maybe?? Who knows?

EBBassMan · #2 01-26-2009, 11:19 AM

So long as you're not a dedicated "tribute" band, then I don't see anything wrong with it. It's when you're doing a tribute that people want to hear the exact songs note for note IME.

Joel S. · #3 01-26-2009, 11:23 AM

As a rule, I learn basslines to be close to the recording, but with my own twist on them. If there's a recognizable part, fill, or hook, I learn that.

It does depend on the song and how the band intends on playing it. Some songs I don't really play like the recording at all, and neither does the rest of the band, others I play mostly note for note.

onlyclave · #4 01-26-2009, 11:23 AM

I think you should make cover tunes your own, but try and do it tastefully. I don't think an exposition of your slap chops on a James Taylor song isn't appropriate, but reharmonizing it might sound cool.

bassteban · #5 01-26-2009, 11:26 AM

For me it would depend on the gig. What's expected? Are you getting paid to play a specific set/tune or are you making an artistic statement all your own? Tribute? Covers? Bars? Experimental? I think there's a place for very strict interpretation of the original as well as complete buthcery, w/lots of room between.

JTE · #6 01-26-2009, 11:37 AM

Depends on the song and the gig. If I was in a band doing modern pop music where everything's processed, then I'd probably have to play it just like the recording. But most of my life playing covers has been in bands that are doing stuff where the SONG was more important than the RECORDING. That distinction between song and record has been increasingly obliterated so that the specific performance on a recording is now confused with the song.

Some songs and parts of songs you gotta play what's there. You're doing a cover of a Muddy Water's song however? Then play what sounds and feels right with THIS drummer and THIS guitarist and THIS singer. Covering "White Room"? Well there are parts that are key to the sound of the song, but the whole point of Cream was the interplay between those three people. So, I'll start with Jack's lines, but I won't merely regurgitate them slavishy. That song stand very well by itself distinct from the "original" recording, and even from various live versions over the decades.

jte

Silas Martinez · #7 01-26-2009, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bassteban

For me it would depend on the gig. What's expected? Are you getting paid to play a specific set/tune or are you making an artistic statement all your own? Tribute? Covers? Bars? Experimental? I think there's a place for very strict interpretation of the original as well as complete buthcery, w/lots of room between.

I agree.

Lots of times, it depends on how your band typically handles this stuff, as well. Some bands, rarely cover/bar bands, but commonly tribute style bands, want to get things as close to 'perfect' as possible. Others plan on 'reinterpreting', and purposefully change things up to a greater or lesser extent to suit the band's style. Still others (most others, IME), go for 'close enough'. If the audience can recognize it, you hit signature phrases, and it grooves, then its good enough.

chroma601 · #8 01-26-2009, 11:54 AM

It also depends on your bandmates. If they are open to making their own version of a song, that's one thing. But if they are all playing the song "as recorded" it does tie your hands. Still, I always prefer to inject some degree of originality to covers. Your poll should have a "little bit of wiggle room" option.

Bass_Bear · #9 01-26-2009, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTE

Depends on the song and the gig. If I was in a band doing modern pop music where everything's processed, then I'd probably have to play it just like the recording. But most of my life playing covers has been in bands that are doing stuff where the SONG was more important than the RECORDING. That distinction between song and record has been increasingly obliterated so that the specific performance on a recording is now confused with the song.

Some songs and parts of songs you gotta play what's there. You're doing a cover of a Muddy Water's song however? Then play what sounds and feels right with THIS drummer and THIS guitarist and THIS singer. Covering "White Room"? Well there are parts that are key to the sound of the song, but the whole point of Cream was the interplay between those three people. So, I'll start with Jack's lines, but I won't merely regurgitate them slavishy. That song stand very well by itself distinct from the "original" recording, and even from various live versions over the decades.

jte

I particularly agree with your point of view JTE. In this case, the song asks for a somewhat funky 'walk' during the verse, and this was my initial issue. I kept the same feel, just altered the notes. The crescendo feel of the progression is definitely still present in the bass line, I just decided to add my own little twist. Suffice it to say I'm happy to hear that everyone agrees that within reason, and in keeping with the songs original feel, changes are good.

J

unclejane · #10 01-26-2009, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bass_Bear

So here I am learning a new song the band I jam with plans to cover, for those of you who are curious out there, Ziggy Stardust by David Bowie. So I've got the chords down, as well as most of the bassline. Here is my question, not for lack of being able to perform it physically, but I wanna know what you guys think of whether or not its important to be as faithful as possible to the original bassline?

Now don't get me wrong, Gail Ann Dorsay is incredible at playing her part, in fact I'm surprised no one mentions her more than this but....oh wait where was I? Oh yeah, what I'm trying to ask here is whether or not you gigging vets and you basement bassists think its okay to diverge from the original line, all the while staying within the song and keeping the groove. Lemme know what you guys think.

Cheers,
J

PS - Is this is the right section? General Instruction maybe?? Who knows?

Er, I stick to the original bass line unless there's some part I can't play. Er then, like, I do my own thing

.....

When I was gigging I did play with a couple of cover groups. In one, we did "zap" by Eric Johnson; there was just no way I could play the solo even approaching as well as roscoe beck, so I, er, diverged from the original to say the least and came up with my own thing. Glad none of that stuff ever got recorded.

We did a lot of Yes material in one of my other groups and I had to improvise, so to speak, some of those parts too (on "roundabout" I even used a pick in the fast strumming parts in the middle). Some of that did get recorded and how to get hold of it is a highly classified secret.

Otherwise, if at all possible I try to stick to the same bassline and emulate the sound as much as I can with my rig. the audience seems to prefer that the song sound as much like it did played by the original band as possible. So that's what I tried to do back when I was gigging.

LS

ysand · #11 01-26-2009, 04:26 PM

"Spice" the basslines up, especially in some boring-basswise rock songs.
BUT don't go way too far cos the feeling of the song must remain!

Phil Smith · #12 01-26-2009, 05:12 PM

Often times the original band won't be faithful to the original, but like others have said, support the tune and all should be good.

ac1710 · #13 01-26-2009, 06:21 PM

Do what you like it's your version.
You ain't Gail Ann Dorsey and your band sure ain't David Bowie. If you aren't going to stamp your own artistic statement on the music then whats the point?

Sure if your just replicating the original then fine you should pay attention to the bass part, especially the tone and the feel. But it doesn't sound like your doing that so work out what your version of the song is about then play your bass to match that.

Zappstorius · #14 01-26-2009, 06:49 PM

I'd say spice it up, unless it's the main melody line to the song...i.e. "Money" or "The Wall" by Pink Floyd are a couple tunes that come to mind. But even then, I try to put my own twist on things.

Bass_Bear · #15 01-26-2009, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ac1710

Do what you like it's your version.
You ain't Gail Ann Dorsey and your band sure ain't David Bowie. If you aren't going to stamp your own artistic statement on the music then whats the point?

Sure if your just replicating the original then fine you should pay attention to the bass part, especially the tone and the feel. But it doesn't sound like your doing that so work out what your version of the song is about then play your bass to match that.

I especially agree with this and for that reason, I think your right, it has become ours and so we should make it our own. Thanks for clearing that up. My conscience and the feeling that I owed the author has cleared.

**Pacman** · #16 01-26-2009, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bass_Bear

PS - Is this is the right section? General Instruction maybe?? Who knows?

No. But I'll move it to Miscellaneous for you.

KPJ · #17 01-27-2009, 06:26 AM

I'm surprised that no one has pointed this out, but Gail Ann Dorsey did not play on the original "Ziggy Stardust". I believe that was Trevor Bolder. So, she most likely is re-interpreting the original part if that is the version that you are covering.

Phalex · #18 01-27-2009, 07:04 AM

Every one has their own "style" and their own unique strengths and weaknesses as they pertain to playing. Some things turn out just fine as an exact duplicate of a recording, but one should always play to their strengths.

Besides a live version of a studio recording has so many more possible nuances. My drummer and myself screw with each other constantly when we play. It keeps things interesting, and last week more than one person mentioned how much fun we have with each other.

Do what feels right.

Atoz · #19 01-27-2009, 07:14 AM

Nothing wrong with doing your own thing, IMHO. Jack Bruce probably didn't play "White Room" the same way twice when doing it live.

Bass_Bear · #20 01-27-2009, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KPJ

I'm surprised that no one has pointed this out, but Gail Ann Dorsey did not play on the original "Ziggy Stardust". I believe that was Trevor Bolder. So, she most likely is re-interpreting the original part if that is the version that you are covering.

I think I may have known that, I simply had just come back from watching Bowie concert on DVD and it was filmed in 2007, which means it was her. And well she has some mad chops so I guess I felt I had to mention her.

J