There is no such thing as "Covers".

[Pilgrim]

I heard an interview with the singer Nancy Wilson last weekend, and she made a great point. She mentioned that the term "covers" is relatively new, and that it wasn't used a few years ago.

She pointed out that as recently as the 60's, when a great piece of music was written, Frank Sinatra would do a version, Dean Martin would do his version, Patti Page would do her version, etc. This makes perfect sense...and it's true. When great music came out, every major artist would do a version, and people enjoyed all of them. (Well, maybe not everyone liked the Jerry Vale or Jim Nabors versions.)

Think about the big band era - consider how many bands have done their own versions of Glenn Miller's A String of Pearls, In the Mood, Moonlight Serenade and American Patrol; Benny Goodman's Moonglow, Get Happy or Stompin' At the Savoy; and Dean Martin's hits like That's Amore, Volare or You're Nobody Till Somebody Loves You. You couldn't have a band without having these classics in your repertoire, and including them throughout your sets. I've played in a "big band", and we played all that stuff.

Nobody considered these to be "covers". It's just that artist or band performing a great piece of music...and everyone enjoyed them.

The same is true today - when your band plays a killer version of a classic rock song, or a great surf tune, or a big country hit, you're playing YOUR version of that great tune. It's not a "cover", it's your band playing your interpretation and your version.

THERE ARE NO COVERS. There are just great pieces of music that are worth playing again and again.

Let's get over this silly fixation on labeling music and bands as to whether you're a "cover band" or not, and get on with playing great music well!

Play your own originals - that's fine! Play great music that you and the audience have heard before - that's ALSO fine!

[elgecko]

...and when someone plays along to a song on youtube, can we stop calling those covers too? Those are play-alongs!

[onosson]

I like this point of view

[elgecko]

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

...Think about the big band era - consider how many bands have done their own versions of Glenn Miller's A String of Pearls, In the Mood, Moonlight Serenade and American Patrol; Benny Goodman's Moonglow, Get Happy or Stompin' At the Savoy; and Dean Martin's hits like That's Amore, Volare or You're Nobody Till Somebody Loves You. You couldn't have a band without having these classics in your repertoire, and including them throughout your sets. I've played in a "big band", and we played all that stuff...

I've played those tunes too but did it really happen at the top level during the peak of the era? Did Benny Goodman's band do a version of Take the A Train? Did Basie's band do Pennsylvania 6-5000?

[jonathan_matos5]

its called cover as in cover your arse. today because of sue happy lawyers and record companies it is impossible to play a song just because you like it, or because it is a great song. you gotta give credit to the writer or the record label or ... to keep yourself out of the courthouse and on the stage.

[fdeck]

Originally Posted by elgecko

I've played those tunes too but did it really happen at the top level during the peak of the era? Did Benny Goodman's band do a version of Take the A Train? Did Basie's band do Pennsylvania 6-5000?

I don't know about those specific examples, but in general, the great bands did borrow tunes from one another. They also arranged popular show tunes of the day. One thing to note is that those were dance bands, and had to fill up an entire four hours with dance music.

LOL, I recently talked with a guy who saw many of those bands in the 50's. He told me: "It's too bad, those bands were playing such wonderful music, and all we cared about was getting the girl we were dancing with to go home with us."

[GregC]

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

I heard an interview with the singer Nancy Wilson last weekend, and she made a great point. She mentioned that the term "covers" is relatively new, and that it wasn't used a few years ago.

She pointed out that as recently as the 60's, when a great piece of music was written, Frank Sinatra would do a version, Dean Martin would do his version, Patti Page would do her version, etc. This makes perfect sense...and it's true. When great music came out, every major artist would do a version, and people enjoyed all of them. (Well, maybe not everyone liked the Jerry Vale or Jim Nabors versions.)

Think about the big band era - consider how many bands have done their own versions of Glenn Miller's A String of Pearls, In the Mood, Moonlight Serenade and American Patrol; Benny Goodman's Moonglow, Get Happy or Stompin' At the Savoy; and Dean Martin's hits like That's Amore, Volare or You're Nobody Till Somebody Loves You. You couldn't have a band without having these classics in your repertoire, and including them throughout your sets. I've played in a "big band", and we played all that stuff.

Nobody considered these to be "covers". It's just that artist or band performing a great piece of music...and everyone enjoyed them.

The same is true today - when your band plays a killer version of a classic rock song, or a great surf tune, or a big country hit, you're playing YOUR version of that great tune. It's not a "cover", it's your band playing your interpretation and your version.

THERE ARE NO COVERS. There are just great pieces of music that are worth playing again and again.

Let's get over this silly fixation on labeling music and bands as to whether you're a "cover band" or not, and get on with playing great music well!

Play your own originals - that's fine! Play great music that you and the audience have heard before - that's ALSO fine!

I don't think there's anything wrong with using the term, it's not pejorative. It's shorthand to distinguish between playing originals and songs that other people made famous.

An addendum to your history lesson is useful, I believe: Before the Beatles, most artists played music that was written by someone else--often songwriters who weren't performers at all. When artists started playing their own originals, that's probably when the term "covers" came about to describe the distinction.

[jonathan_matos5]

Originally Posted by GregC

I don't think there's anything wrong with using the term, it's not pejorative. It's shorthand to distinguish between playing originals and songs that other people made famous.

An addendum to your history lesson is useful, I believe: Before the Beatles, most artists played music that was written by someone else--often songwriters who weren't performers at all. When artists started playing their own originals, that's probably when the term "covers" came about to describe the distinction.

a lot of todays music is written for the performer. just look at all the teeny pop crap Disney is pumping out. ever notice how the music sounds the same but only a 12 year old can distinguish who is "singing".

[GregC]

Originally Posted by jonathan_matos5

a lot of todays music is written for the performer.

Other than the Disney stuff, I don't see a whole lot of that.

Regardless, I believe there's a direct connection between the trend towards performers writing their own music and the origin of the term "covers".

[Pilgrim]

Originally Posted by GregC

I don't think there's anything wrong with using the term, it's not pejorative. It's shorthand to distinguish between playing originals and songs that other people made famous.

An addendum to your history lesson is useful, I believe: Before the Beatles, most artists played music that was written by someone else--often songwriters who weren't performers at all. When artists started playing their own originals, that's probably when the term "covers" came about to describe the distinction.

I agree with your first point - in general. But it's clear from posts on this and other forums that some people think covers are second class music and that it is demeaning to play, as a "real artist" plays originals...clearly a pejorative connotation in those cases. My assertion is that this is nonsense.

I play in a surf band, and by tradition, surf bands play such classics as Pipeline, Walk Don't Run and Wipe Out. To me, that seems very much like a big band playing classics by Glenn Miller, and that's not a "cover band".

I suggest that the movement to music written by band members was growing before the Beatles, and began occurring with the movement from big band to popular music in the 50's. For instance, J.P. Richardson (The Big Bopper) wrote and performed "Chantilly Lace" and it became a huge hit. Bo Diddley wrote and recorded "Who Do You Love".

On further reflection, it's an interesting thought - the British invasion and the subsequent rock music which emerged in the 60's did indeed have numerous artists like the Beatles, The Who, the Moody Blues and other bands which wrote and recorded their own music.

It's true that Elvis and many of the other most popular recording artists of the 50's generally performed music written by others.

But the Beatles started out playing Twist and Shout and lots of other established hits (some of which they recorded and released) - and I doubt too many people would refer to them as "a cover band".

[jrthebassguy]

It must be a generational thing, since I completely disagree with the sentiment. I rarely like playing other people's songs. In the era of Glee and Kidz Bop, people really need to focus on creating something of their own, rather than ripping something wholesale that was never theirs to begin with.

[Kwesi]

I agree with the general idea but I don't see why the word "cover" couldn't still be used. A song is made by someone and anyone who plays it obviously wouldn't be playing the song itself but rather their interpretation of it. Isn't that the exact definition of a cover? It does seem silly to call, say, a jazz tune a cover but I don't see a better word for it. When it comes down to it, cover is just a term used to say that the song wasn't yours first.

[electracoyote]

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

But the Beatles started out playing Twist and Shout and lots of other established hits (some of which they recorded and released) - and I doubt too many people would refer to them as "a cover band."

I think most people who understand music history and the intended meanings of the terminology would definitely label the Early Beatles as a "cover band." The Beatles performed many songs that were originally written, recorded, and popularized by other artists.

Nancy Wilson's comments are surely based on a by-gone era of popular entertainment, where a dedicated songwriter would produce a song which was then fair game for a host of vocalists to put their distinct brand on.

For example, the standard "The Way You Look Tonight" was first recorded by Fred Astaire in 1936, but "versions" of the song ( NOT "cover versions") have also been recorded by Billie Holiday, Frank Sinatra, Doris Day, Johnny Pace, Tony Bennett, Ella Fitzgerald, Andy Williams, Chad & Jeremy, Bryan Ferry, Olivia Newton-John, Johnny Maestro, Phil Collins, Harry Connick, Jr., Rod Stewart, Dexys Midnight Runners, James Darren, Michael Bublé, Sal Viviano, Steve Tyrell, Joey McIntyre, Maroon 5, Ray Quinn, Kris Allen, Chris Botti, Elena Bennett, Oscar Peterson, and Bing Crosby.

[lunarpollen]

Originally Posted by elgecko

I've played those tunes too but did it really happen at the top level during the peak of the era? Did Benny Goodman's band do a version of Take the A Train? Did Basie's band do Pennsylvania 6-5000?

Many bands covered "Take the 'A' Train." Basie's band did do a version of "Moonlight Serenade." It really did happen at the top level of the peak of the era, bands often played tunes made popular by other bands. And a lot of the tunes bands played were written by songwriters who weren't even in bands.

Bands were often well known for their particular arrangements of tunes rather than just the for the tunes themselves. "In The Mood" was played by the bands of Edgar Hayes and Artie Shaw in 1938 before Glenn Miller did his famous 1939 version.

[lunarpollen]

To me a "cover tune" is just a tune you play that was written by someone else. No big deal. Sure, if you're in a band whose members can't write, and you play songs written by your brother and a few friends who aren't in bands, you could technically say that you're in a "cover band," but I usually reserve that term for bands whose bulk of material consists of publicly known tunes by other artists, as a gimmick. But if you are doing a fair mix of original tunes along with the cover tunes, then I would not call it a cover band.

[carlos840]

To expand a bit on the beatles thing, i read an interview of Paul where he says that the reason the Beatles started to write their own songs was because they often where the last band on stage, and by the time they started playing, most of their set ('cover songs') had already been played once or twice by the previous bands on!
Thats why they though they should write their own tunes!

[champbassist]

Originally Posted by jonathan_matos5

its called cover as in cover your arse. today because of sue happy lawyers and record companies it is impossible to play a song just because you like it, or because it is a great song. you gotta give credit to the writer or the record label or ... to keep yourself out of the courthouse and on the stage.

+1 This was actually the first thing that came to my mind when I read the thread title, i.e. this would be a thread about some artist complaining that there are no covers, every time a song is covered, it's being stolen, or something like that.

[hrodbert696]

I agree that there's no reason for people to get a stick up their butt over covers-v-originals. A great song is a great song and no one should get on anyone's case for playing great songs. Also, some people are good song writers and other people are good performers and only a few people are both.

Still, when one is starting a project and recruiting members, I think it is useful to say "this is a covers band" or "this is an originals band" so that people have a sense of what's going to be asked of them. A covers band can say, "here's the list of songs to practice for next week." An originals band is going to come together to jam over a riff or progression or a set of lyrics and work out parts until it comes together.

[Skitch it!]

I like the term 'versions', I think it's a better descriptive for interpreting a track and adding your own 'vibe' to it.

[fdeck]

A cover is any tune that you play the same way more than once.