• 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.

Covers

DLaunder

DLaunder

Sep 8, 2010
185
69
NH
#1
Ok guys,
I just joined a new band and things are looking great and sounding even better, but I have one issues I can't seem to get over. They don't cover songs accurately. My feeling is that it's one thing to do your own version of a song, but it's other to play a song with incorrect cord progressions. When challenged on it they tell me that "we're making it our own" (BS), and that it's easier for me to get over it than have everyone relearn the tune (cop-out). So what's the feeling out there? Am I over thinking things, or should I stand my ground. Have any of you had similar challenges? If so, how did you overcome it. I'm thinking because we're all new to one another this issue may resolve itself.
 
#3
If you're not happy with the band then ask yourself if what they pay you is enough for you to go with this. If it's not (or they simply don't pay you) then you already know the answer.

To me it sounds that these people aren't that much musically "educated", and since i've been in your place with such bands if it were me i'd be already out of there.
 
#4
In a band you should all be able to come to agreements and if you don't then you'll just be a less bigger Oasis, splitting up cause you can't agree over what yoghurts to buy at the supermarket. Raise your opinion and have a democracy, remember you're working together as a team, not just one person.
 
#5
IMO, when a song is covered, it should be accurate. Unless you're a very established band and "making it your own" as they say. A good example is Disturbed's cover of Land of Confusion. It's clearly the same song, but it has been down tuned and they put their stamp on it. There is no question about who is covering it. However, it is still very close to the Genesis version so there is no question as to what song it is.

Just my .02
 
#7
There's "accuracy" and there's "suckassity". They don't have to be mutually inclusive. If the songs are "inaccurate", but chicks still dance to them and the band gets paid for playing them, no foul.

It's still possible for a band to play all the right notes and still not play the song correctly.

If it sucks it sucks, but a faithful reproduction of the studio version isn't necessarily the key.
 
#8
Even bands who originally wrote/recorded a given song seldom play it the exact same way live. I can't think of a single band that I've ever been in, that could 100% accurately "cover" anything that any other band had done. So, in my opinion, there's to way anybody (even the original artists) should be held to an "original arrangement/recording" standard. That also gives tremendous freedom to improvise, adapt, & make something your own!

PS: Why is this in Live Sound?
 
#9
+1 to Phalex.

For most audiences, judging a cover band depends way more on the quality of the lead and harmony vocals, the songbook choices, and the band's ability to bring some fire on tunes that (ahem!) probably aren't their own personal favorites.

Whether note-for-note is better doesn't really matter so much in the OP's situation. The larger issues are what the band's willing to do, and how he's going to roll with it.

It sounds like you've raised the issue with the band, and they're not budging. If "things are looking great and sounding better than ever," then you might want to come to peace with their approach. If you can't get over it and it will drive you nuts, move on while you're still all on fairly good terms. "Standing your ground" might be a sound tactic in a fight, but if you approach this as a fight, you've lost already.
 
#10
When making a cover "your-own" the only thing that should be untouchable is the hook, or whatever makes that song unique. Everything else including time signature, certain lyrics, the beat, instrumentation, feel, and even the chords are fair game. Some things have to be changed especially going from one genre to another.

But yeah, you have to have all the good points of the song intact.
 
#11
My guitarist will tell me he wants to cover a song at rehearsal so I sit down and learn it note for note. Next rehearsal we will set out to play it and argue the whole time. He's never close to the right key or chord progressions. Eventually I get tired of arguing and learn his version.

These days I won't even learn the original. I just pick his version up on the spot. Some of them turn out surprisingly well!
 
#14
All good feed back. Thanks guys. The band sounds tight considering we have all just come together a few weeks ago. This is a reflection of the musicianship of the members. We're plowing through alot on the set list and I generally like the situation I'm in. I'm going to take all the advice - STFU, make it sound ballsy, get over it, and put this post in it's proper place next time.

Thanks All!:bassist:
 
#15
No excuse for not getting covers at least close with all the tablature out there.
I used to wear-out my LPs learning my parts, back before CDs and free tabs.

They are lazy, uneducated, unskilled, and a bit pompous about it.
Or a case of serious denial.

I would run and never look back.
Think of the humiliation, hacking through bad covers in front of your friends.
 
#16
This. I agree that the "hook" is what's important. I for one cannot stand to hear a cover exactly like the original, I would listen to the CD if I wanted to hear that. I enjoy nothing more than listening to local bands put their stamp on songs. Some of the bands I have played in have had lots of comments like "we really like your version" of song X. Now, of course, if your version just sucks then that is a different story all together.:hiding:


Nev375 said:
When making a cover "your-own" the only thing that should be untouchable is the hook, or whatever makes that song unique. Everything else including time signature, certain lyrics, the beat, instrumentation, feel, and even the chords are fair game. Some things have to be changed especially going from one genre to another.

But yeah, you have to have all the good points of the song intact.
Click to expand...
 
#17
KeithAlanK said:
No excuse for not getting covers at least close with all the tablature out there.
I used to wear-out my LPs learning my parts, back before CDs and free tabs.

They are lazy, uneducated, unskilled, and a bit pompous about it.
Or a case of serious denial.

I would run and never look back.
Think of the humiliation, hacking through bad covers in front of your friends.
Click to expand...
You use tablature, and others are lazy, uneducated and unskilled because they don't do covers note for note? Good luck finding a band, dude ;)
 
#18
i think his point is just that with something as ubiquitous as online tabs to figure it out for you, there's no excuse for getting the damn chords wrong. that's not even close to being a "note-for-note" nazi.
 
#19
It's ridiculous to learn every song note for note. For some songs close is good enough. I mean, provided everyone is at least playing the right chords and the basic beat is still there. I'm sure there are guys have learned Brown Eyed Girl note for note. I'm not one of 'em. On the other side of that, a Rush cover better be pretty damned close.
 
#20
phatbass said:
If you've joined an "established" band, you do things their way.

As a gig-whore I've played with some real prizes, but I've had to learn to just STFU and play other people's interpretations of covers when I'm subbing, even when they're obviously wrong.
Click to expand...

I'll add that my own approach if it's a project I'm actually part of, rather than an employee/sub, is to get the groove, chords, and signature bits right.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back