+1
Not just lack of musicianship, but outright laziness. Funny how 99% of the time "our own way" consists of leaving out the hard parts and playing the same tired lead break wankery on every song.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
By the Record or " With Our Own Twist"?
- Thread starter Jarred Harris
- Start date
Not just lack of musicianship, but outright laziness. Funny how 99% of the time "our own way" consists of leaving out the hard parts and playing the same tired lead break wankery on every song.
There have been times I've altered a bass line here and there as I simply thought the original wasn't that good. Certainly, there are some things I wouldn't try to emulate the timing of even if I did play all the same notes.
But then...
it depends ... Red Hot Chili Peppers add some solo and jamming otherwise the songs are the same. Same scenario for Primus and Dream Theater.
Pretty much any metal band also play the same thing live, otherwise it would break the songs.
Understood. However, if they're adding anything or jamming they're not doing it NFN. And the relative merits of doing a cover NFN is what this thread is all about.
Can't speak for metal never having played in a metal band. But I come out of the prog world mainly. And in that genre tight and carefully crafted arrangements are the norm. So I can understand to some extent what you're saying. But even there we had a decent degree of flex when performing. And our songs and arrangements evolved over time. So a song we were currently performing might have only a strong similarity to the original version we were playing shortly after we wrote it.
To me, NFN is insisting a snapshot of a scene is the same thing as the stage play itself. And I'm not sure what's behind someone thinking like that. Although I suspect lack of confidence in one's own musicality (and maybe a little goo-goo eyed "we are not worthy!" hero worship to be perfectly blunt about it) makes up a good part of it.
There's a big gulf between doing something half-assed because you don't care; and trying something different - and possibly failing - because you were striving for something more. So I think it's a little disingenuous to try and lump the two together and argue any band that doesn't want to 'paint by numbers' and do what (purely in my own book) amounts to glorified karaoke is simply lazy or talentless. I don't personally care if some band prides itself on note for note photocopying of some other band's song. But I do object the way some of them somehow feel that makes them a superior band purely because of that. Maybe they are are far better band than their competition. But IMO it isn't just because they can play their set list NFN.
Not trying to be a jerk, but my gut response to that was "Does that pay well?"
Not that money needs to be the prime motivator in musical, or other types of, endeavors...
I'm sure I'm going to say this at some rehearsal. Will try to remember to cite you!
"That's GOLD, JERRY...GOLD! "
It is a very strange attitude to me. The whole idea of rock and roll is to do something individualistic. With all your wild hairdos, tattoos, and the rest, if you believe that the "Only Correct" way to play a rock and roll song is the one true way it was published on a record, you're basically doing exactly the same thing as the old guys in tuxedos running through that Brahms symphony for the thousandth time, or the geeky kids in concert band playing the Suite of Moldy American Dances yet again.
And as far as country goes, listen to some Jimmie Rodgers or the Carter Family and tell my THEY were insisting on playing anything "the same way as when we recorded it".
And as far as country goes, listen to some Jimmie Rodgers or the Carter Family and tell my THEY were insisting on playing anything "the same way as when we recorded it".
I think you just answered your own question. However:Not trying to be a jerk, but my gut response to that was "Does that pay well?"
Not that money needs to be the prime motivator in musical, or other types of, endeavors...
1) People generally notice the absence of the bass player, not the presence.
2) I'm not doing anything crazy, like feeding a fruit bread through the strings or playing 32nd note polychordal arpeggios over top of a I-IV-V shuffle (hint: It would still sound boring). I'm generally rearranging the progression with inversions and upper extensions so that the bass line is more contiguous and better fuses the drums into the arrangement, there's a contrapuntal melody that accentuates the lyrical melody, and there's more pronounced tension and resolution during the song's climax.
Last edited:
Those of you who think the audience notices how close to the original you are, are foolibg yourselves. I played in a band with an awful guitarist for a year, who'd dumb down every guitar part to basic beginner chords and strum. The drummer was more of a percussionist. Only good aspect (before I joined) was the singer. People loved them/us. It sounded nothing close to the original, but the singer delivered and made the songs recognizable enough. Voila, happy audience.
Do what pleases you, have fun with it and smile. That's what counts. YMMV...
Do what pleases you, have fun with it and smile. That's what counts. YMMV...
I think it depends how much you vary the bass line such that it takes it away from the "spirit" of the song. E.g. I've played Crazy Train note for note because its pretty core to that song and any changes or noodling I think would have been encroaching on the guitar. I've played Sweet Child O' Mine keeping the intro note for note but playing the rest in the "spirit" of the original. I.e. outlining the chords, playing some octaves here and there - it was more seeing how the rest of the band was feeling the song and jamming along accordingly rather than worrying "on the first verse he plays two 16th notes in the second bar but on the second verse he plays one 8th note." Some bass lines are iconic and other times there is wiggle room. When I've heard covers at shows I've never found myself policing what the bass player is doing (or not doing).
Exactly! It depends on how iconic, or recognizable it is. Between my various bands' covers of country to nu-metal to pop I'd play "The Impression That I Get" fairly straightforward. I will take my libertieswith "Call Me Maybe", just to make it slightly more interesting and dynamic.
IMO everyone has license to play their own style. That said, I find learning note for note bass lines is very crucial in improving my playing. I like to learn as close to note for note as I can get first, then add my own style to the song. I really don't like to stray too far from the original feel of the song being covered. I find it's very satisfying figuring out bass player lines like Chuck Rainey and the like. It's all about getting as good as you can before you die....LOL. And having fun doing it..
I play all sorts of covers, some just have to be note perfect such as Comfortably Numb or it just wouldn't sound right whereas Proud Mary can have your own twiddly bits so long as you can nail the principal riffs which are the recognizable bits of the song.
Some songs can be much more fluid on the bass line so long as one follows the chord progressions as played on the night.
I had this same argument/discussion with different band members over my playing time, and I look at it this way. There are a lot of cover bands out there. I've been in both nfn and "freestyle, but close", bands. I go by what the audience says, or what I hear from others. Many times, I've heard "Wow! That band was great! Just like the originals! Who were they again?" I've also heard "Wow! (Insert band name here) was great last night! I was on my feet all night.!" Nfn has it's place, just as freestyle does. As long as you nail the start and finish, not many would notice the middle, unless you really suck. 
As a bass player, being in a cover band can be a good education and can really add to your musicianship if you use it to your benefit. If you're learning a tune with a part that is out of your comfort zone, it's a good exercise to learn it and analyze what elements of it work, and what doesn't work, and what you can incorporate into your own approach. Also, and this may not be as relevant with country, if different techniques are used on the tracks you're covering (i.e. pick, slap, doubling with synth, etc.) check all of that out as well and learn it if it's not already part of your vocabulary. Also, listen to the whole track and figure out how everything fits together.
Re. the OP's question, it's up to you to figure out whether playing the original part verbatim is important to make the song work, or if you can take liberties or even improve on the original part. It also would depend on how strictly the other people you're playing with are sticking to the original.
Some of the most successful touring or session bass players I know came up playing in cover bands, and I know that experience played a part in adding to their toolboxes.
Re. the OP's question, it's up to you to figure out whether playing the original part verbatim is important to make the song work, or if you can take liberties or even improve on the original part. It also would depend on how strictly the other people you're playing with are sticking to the original.
Some of the most successful touring or session bass players I know came up playing in cover bands, and I know that experience played a part in adding to their toolboxes.
Many famous musicians/bands don't even play their own stuff live remotely close to the original recording, so who cares if it's not EXACTLY like the way it was originally done. Some stuff in the studio happens by wonderful accident and can't be replicated the same way or it's forgotten how it was done. My mentality is if you want to hear the original, then stay home and listen to the cd or go see the original artist do it if you can. I'm not a paid professional musician ( I play in a church worship band as a regular on the roster) and thrash and death metal music with friends for fun. I'm not going to spend hours perfecting every little ghost note and nuance to please the cork sniffers. Yes, sometimes there are things beyond my skill level so I do put my own spin on it so long as the mood/vibe of the original song is not lost. I've never had any complaints. In fact, I often joke that just like lighting never strikes the same place twice, I never play the same thing twice. Playing the same thing the same way over and over is downright boring so if I'm having a good time I spice things up a bit. I certainly hope that most of us can spot a hack wether they play note for note or not.
Had a guy play guitar with us to see if he wanted to join our team. He got so upset that we weren't playing it IDENTICAL to the original (my guess is that he practiced and learned them that way and didn't have the skill to make SIMPLE changes). To the point where he would stop playing mid song and shake his head and gripe. I felt like asking if he also copied his way through high school
Had a guy play guitar with us to see if he wanted to join our team. He got so upset that we weren't playing it IDENTICAL to the original (my guess is that he practiced and learned them that way and didn't have the skill to make SIMPLE changes). To the point where he would stop playing mid song and shake his head and gripe. I felt like asking if he also copied his way through high school
Last edited:
