• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

I have a problem with cover/tribute bands.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Any really good song or piece of music exists to be played by whoever can interpret it in a way that can touch someone.

The operative word in your statement is "can", though- not everyone who does a cover reinterprets the song the way Hendrix did with "All Along The Watchtower", for example. Take your average weekend warrior sports bar duffers (not talking about anyone here, of course) belting out "Mustang Sally" for the billionth time- are they reinterpreting the song, or just regurgitating it?

Sure you can put your own stamp on a great song, but I don't see that done very often.
 
I have to agree with the thread start that cover bands are worthless. Its cool if your 16 and starting to learn your instrument but sooner or later you need to grow a pair and put your art out there for people. I think of it this way, its like LOUD taking over the Ampeg company. They bank on old equipment and don't bring anything new to the table. And now people are hating new Ampeg stuff. When I hear a song being butcher and played out the song loses its luster.
 
However---and I'm not talking about you personally---but, when I did the original scene there were alot of bands writing pedestrian music with trite lyrics and acting like rock stars.

Honestly, I can see how someone in a cover band can find that obnoxious and want to strike a blow against those guys.

Ha, if there is one thing in the world that is more annoying and infuriating than a wanna-be rockstar in a band with terrible songs (and that's a big if!), its a wanna-be rock star in a cover band!

Though, from my expirience, most people in coverbands are down-to-earth and real professional. The others though...woah boy!
 
The operative word in your statement is "can", though- not everyone who does a cover reinterprets the song the way Hendrix did with "All Along The Watchtower", for example. Take your average weekend warrior sports bar duffers (not talking about anyone here, of course) belting out "Mustang Sally" for the billionth time- are they reinterpreting the song, or just regurgitating it?

Sure you can put your own stamp on a great song, but I don't see that done very often.
I think you already understand that "weekend warriors", as you call them, play originals as well as covers.

Somebody belting out their own stuff for the first time can be just as dreadful as someone playing Mustang Sally for the billionth, despite their no doubt noble intentions.
 
I have to agree with the thread start that cover bands are worthless.

Depends on your criteria. If you're interested in creative expression through songwriting at the expense of any sort of commercial concern then yes, cover bands are worthless. But if you just enjoy playing music no matter who wrote it and like getting paid in the bargain, then there's no point in playing in original bands. Neither approach is "better", the universe is large enough for everyone.

When I was young I used to get PO'd at cover bands because I thought they were crowding out original music, but then I realized that just wasn't true. The crowd at dollar beer night at your local college pickup bar is just not going to want to hear originals, no matter what. Neither is the audience on the country club wedding circuit. Likewise, the guys that hung out at the "rock" bar would string up any band trying to play "Brown Eyed Girl".

And so it goes.
 
Somebody belting out their own stuff for the first time can be just as dreadful as someone playing Mustang Sally for the billionth, despite their no doubt noble intentions.

Oh yeah, I freely admit that 90% of original bands are total crap. And some of them are famous rock stars!

But without the remaining 10%, rock music would be stagnant, like an exhibit in a museum.
 
And 90% of cover bands are total crap. And ALL of them are making money. :)

Ha, maybe 10 years ago, but around here competition at the bottom is fierce now- "Rock Band" and the bartender's iPod have put a lot of weekend warriors out of work. The "pro" bands don't seem to be having any problems, though. That stuff never seems to mess with the originals crowd, either.

Point taken, though.
 
And 90% of cover bands are total crap. And ALL of them are making money. :)

Sounds like you've seen my band a time or 2 Joe! One of the things I enjoy most about my crappy cover band (We gotta be 87th percentile at least!) is that when a fellow bassist makes the trek out to the crowded bar we're playing in, I love to hand over my bass and let them take my band for a spin! Maybe I do it because I don't take my "art" dead serious, or maybe I do it because we play stuff that everybody knows. It was very hard to get folks to sit in when they didn't know any of the tunes. (I had a hard time myself because the singer / song writer would not leave well enough alone, and the arrangements changed every freaking show!)

Anyway, if you ever make it to Grand Rapids Michigan, there's a beer, a hearty hand shake, and a chance to make my drummer flip me off waiting for you!
 
The operative word in your statement is "can", though- not everyone who does a cover reinterprets the song the way Hendrix did with "All Along The Watchtower", for example. Take your average weekend warrior sports bar duffers (not talking about anyone here, of course) belting out "Mustang Sally" for the billionth time- are they reinterpreting the song, or just regurgitating it?

Sure you can put your own stamp on a great song, but I don't see that done very often.

I think we're confusing the issue with "songs that have been overplayed or considered cliche." Although I'm gonna stick to my guns and so although it isn't has likely, I stand ready to be entertained by someones vision of Mustang Sally.

The interpretation vs regurgitation is gonna be a really subjective thing to navigate.
 
I think we're confusing the issue with "songs that have been overplayed or considered cliche." Although I'm gonna stick to my guns and so although it isn't has likely, I stand ready to be entertained by someones vision of Mustang Sally.

I just used "Sally" as an example- thousands of bands cover it, but do any of them do anything unique or interesting with it, or do they just puke it out so folks can dance? I think you could reinterpret it in an interesting way, but I've never heard anyone do it. On purpose, anyway.

The interpretation vs regurgitation is gonna be a really subjective thing to navigate.

It's like Ed Meese and porn- you know it when you see it. A bunch of hacks butchering a song isn't "reinterpretation", it's just bad playing. Sonic Youth dismembering the Kinks' "Victoria" may not be your idea of a good time, but it obviously means something to them (and to me).
 
Totally disagree with this statement.

Just for one small example, you need to go find a TV performance of Judy Garland singing Harold Arlens Over the Rainbow somewhere around 1963. She was near the end of her rope and her life. She had sung that song dozens of times.

But at that moment, his song- totally HER expression of what SHE was feeling.

If your statement were true we have just devalued all music.
Any really good song or piece of music exists to be played by whoever can interpret it in a way that can touch someone.

And that is yet another reason that makes this thread kinda dumb...


Whats dumb about this thread? You posted on it didnt you? Everyone has their own opinions, obviously, but I don't think you understood what I was trying to get across.

To make a cross reference - If you write an original diary, then its how YOU feel. If your reading someone elses, then re-copy it because it applies to you, your not stating how you feel. With bass, you get some lee-way in cover songs, to change it up a little here and there. But your still not expressing to the world, or local bar, how you feel. Its someone elses expression being re-itterated.

If you sad as hell, and play aint no sunshine, it'll show you feel sad. But if your sad as hell, and you write your own song off of it, its the ultimate expression of yourself.

This is all just opinion anyway. Its how I feel VS how you feel. So no ones really right. But saying the thread is dumb (even though some people have put up ignorant posts going both ways) is just your way being an elitest, with the "I'm right, your wrong attitude." But eh, its all music :bassist:

-Troy
 
...
To make a cross reference - If you write an original diary, then its how YOU feel. If your reading someone elses, then re-copy it because it applies to you, your not stating how you feel. With bass, you get some lee-way in cover songs, to change it up a little here and there. But your still not expressing to the world, or local bar, how you feel. Its someone elses expression being re-itterated.

With all due respect, you're cross reference misses the point.

A "diary entry" is presumably private and not intended for anyone else to read, let alone use or repeat in public.

This is not the case with songs - that is, unless you are one of those rare composers who is only composing for yourself and also don't want your material heard, let alone played by others or repeated in public.

Further - ascribing motive - i.e. "If you're feeling sad..." or "That song was written as an expression of sadness..." - you are simply doing what many others are doing in this thread - which is assigning your idea of why someone is doing something to "others" and commenting on how YOU'D feel - not on the reality of the situation.

You hear it time and again - People all think this song's about [X] only to discover from the author it was actually about [Y].

It's the very same thing with playing in a band of any "kind". My motivation for doing so and yours could be very similar - could be miles apart - you (and I) just don't know.

What I do know is that I DON'T know why you do it and I would never presume to speculate. Furthermore, I'd certainly not judge you based on my limited understanding of you or why you do anything.

That's the ugly subtext of this discussion - that people have judged others (harshly and unfairly in many cases) and done so "on the record" with comments describing their musical cohorts as "sell-outs" or "elitist" or "worthless".

Hopefully, if there's anything of value to be gained from this discussion, it's that assessing value judgments (good or bad) to musicians simply by the "type" of band they are in is at best a waste of time, at worst severely limiting their own opportunity to be musical.
 
With all due respect, you're cross reference misses the point.

A "diary entry" is presumably private and not intended for anyone else to read, let alone use or repeat in public.

This is not the case with songs - that is, unless you are one of those rare composers who is only composing for yourself and also don't want your material heard, let alone played by others or repeated in public.

Further - ascribing motive - i.e. "If you're feeling sad..." or "That song was written as an expression of sadness..." - you are simply doing what many others are doing in this thread - which is assigning your idea of why someone is doing something to "others" and commenting on how YOU'D feel - not on the reality of the situation.

You hear it time and again - People all think this song's about [X] only to discover from the author it was actually about [Y].

It's the very same thing with playing in a band of any "kind". My motivation for doing so and yours could be very similar - could be miles apart - you (and I) just don't know.

What I do know is that I DON'T know why you do it and I would never presume to speculate. Furthermore, I'd certainly not judge you based on my limited understanding of you or why you do anything.

That's the ugly subtext of this discussion - that people have judged others (harshly and unfairly in many cases) and done so "on the record" with comments describing their musical cohorts as "sell-outs" or "elitist" or "worthless".

Hopefully, if there's anything of value to be gained from this discussion, it's that assessing value judgments (good or bad) to musicians simply by the "type" of band they are in is at best a waste of time, at worst severely limiting their own opportunity to be musical.

Unless your a little jewish girl hiding in a wall during WW II :smug:

I hear ya though....err see you? You could express yourself either way, I was a bit off on that. But there definatly is little creativity when learning others songs. I think it would be harder to learn someone elses bass line, then creating your own, but im sure it goes back and forth ( concerning difficulty)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.