Is there a difference?

[Nomadskills]

Between being in an original band and making up a bass line (Or guitar) to the song writers song and being in a cover band where you make the song "your own"?

[P-oddz]

Yes.

[bassbully]

Yes! Originals band write all their own music it is not made up. My band the bass is written just like any cover song you have ever played and I play it 95% of the time the way it was written.

With covers some guys stick to the written basslines, others cheat. there is nothing wrong with it if it works and the band is ok with it. Some players can't play the lines in a cover song correctly so they change them but if you wrote the lines in an original you must have been able to play it.

[Nomadskills]

Originally Posted by P-oddz

Yes.

Even If you are creating a line to an existing melody?

[Joe Nerve]

Yes. And no. If the band covering the song is making it entirely their own, there is essentially no difference. If your just writing the bassline. If its your song then it's a no brainer.

[Nomadskills]

Originally Posted by Joe Nerve

If its your song then it's a no brainer.

Indeed. That's why I was specific in the question.

[P-oddz]

Originally Posted by Nomadskills

Even If you are creating a line to an existing melody?

I guess I was taking the question from a songwriting perspective, and my personal experience with redoing cover songs (and making them our version).

If you are writing songs in a band as opposed to recreating covers, I would say yes - there is a world of difference. Original songs start with an idea from nowhere and end with many trials of refining and altering it, making it the best it can be. With a cover song, you are not inventing the wheel per se, you are just altering it - putting some new tires on it, if you will. You know what part exists where, and you only need to figure out how to treat that specifically.

But on the other hand, if you are a hired gun whose music has been predetermined and you are not part of the creation process, then I suppose there is not much difference between the two scenarios.

[Nomadskills]

Originally Posted by P-oddz

But on the other hand, if you are a hired gun whose music has been predetermined and you are not part of the creation process, then I suppose there is not much difference between the two scenarios.

I agree with everything you said but quoted this part because it's mainly what I was questioning...

This question is more "out loud" then directly at you P-oddz btw.

But, what if the guitarist (in your originals band) comes in with a song? Not even a hired gun type of deal. He or she had written a song on his own (or could be the primary song writer). The melody is there and maybe even the lyrics.

Is there any difference in making up a line to his/her original or a song that was written and played on the radio?

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by Joe Nerve

Yes. And no. If the band covering the song is making it entirely their own, there is essentially no difference. If your just writing the bassline. If its your song then it's a no brainer.

I would say there is still a difference either way.

In an original situation, the bassline would be entirely made up by the player (assuming the songwriter doesnt say "this is how the bass goes")
In a cover situation the bassline is already there. Even if the player were to change the bassline up and make it their own, they are still likely to work within the framework of the original line.

Basically, the difference is that the cover song already has an idea to springboard from.

[sleeplessknight]

*grabs his popcorn*

THIS is gonna be good. I love an internet slap-fight! :-D

[MarkMgibson]

With an original song, even if you didn't write it, the only person to have played bass on it is you. With a cover, thousands have played a bass line to the song. That's the difference.

[scottbass]

Lots of questions:

• What kind of difference?
• A creative difference?
• A monetary difference?
• Can you only use passive basses with flatwounds for cover songs and only active basses with stainless roundwounds for originals?
• Do you get more Satisfaction playing originals or covers?
• How about girly action?
• Speaking of the Stones, Keith wrote most of the bass lines to their original songs, but Bill Wyman played them - at least when they played live. Does that mean Bill Wyman was playing originals or covers?

And most importantly:

Why does it matter to you if there's a difference?

[lfmn16]

Originally Posted by Nomadskills

Between being in an original band and making up a bass line (Or guitar) to the song writers song and being in a cover band where you make the song "your own"?

Yes. Nobody on talkbass whines and crys when you are in an original band.

Playing note for note vs making your own line for covers has been discussed TO DEATH in a lot of threads. Did you search to see what has already been said before you brought this up again? Are you bringing something new to the conversation or are we just going to rehash the same tired arguments?

[hdracer]

Originally Posted by scottbass

Lots of questions:

• What kind of difference?
• A creative difference?
• A monetary difference?
• Can you only use passive basses with flatwounds for cover songs and only active basses with stainless roundwounds for originals?
• Do you get more Satisfaction playing originals or covers?
• How about girly action?
• Speaking of the Stones, Keith wrote most of the bass lines to their original songs, but Bill Wyman played them - at least when they played live. Does that mean Bill Wyman was playing originals or covers?

And most importantly:

Why does it matter to you if there's a difference?

and now DJ is the highest paid cover bassist in the world!

[Joe Nerve]

Originally Posted by scottbass

And most importantly:

Why does it matter to you if there's a difference?

I believe the op is slightly trollish in its nature. And intended as such. I chimed in just to see where it would go.

[lfmn16]

Originally Posted by Joe Nerve

I believe the op is slightly trollish in its nature. And intended as such. I chimed in just to see where it would go.

Let's save time and get right to the name calling, here is where it always ends up - cover bands are soulless robots with no creativity, original bands are too lazy and talentless to play other people's material. There I just saved 50 pages of posts which will all boil down to this anyway!

[hdracer]

Originally Posted by lfmn16

Let's save time and get right to the name calling, here is where it always ends up - cover bands are soulless robots with no creativity, original bands are too lazy and talentless to play other people's material. There I just saved 50 pages of posts which will all boil down to this anyway!

you forgot playing for a packed house and making money
and playing in front of their friends and family and having to pay to play.....

[scottbass]

Originally Posted by hdracer

and now DJ is the highest paid cover bassist in the world!

Yes, Greg, but is he happy just playing covers?

I was really disappointed when they offered Pino Palladino the Who gig instead of me! I would have gladly given up being creative for that opportunity!!! But I suppose they didn't offer it to me because (1) they didn't know who I was or that I even existed, and (2) up to that point I had only played in originals bands and cover bands in the Midwest, never in the UK like Pino. That's the real difference, if you ask me!

[hdracer]

Originally Posted by scottbass

Yes, Greg, but is he happy just playing covers?

all the way to the bank!!

He has always had a huge smile on his face every time I have seen him playing with the Stones

Oh, and the Who really did need a tall skinny guy on bass.
That's why they didn't call us.
I'm not tall and your not, ah, your not to tall ether .....

[Luke19Boarder]

of course there's a difference. unless you create the same bassline for both scenarios. then they would be the same.