• 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.

I have a problem with cover/tribute bands.

Status
Not open for further replies.
#581
Peanut butter = OK. Jelly = OK. Peanut butter + jelly = Barf.

And now to get back to horse beating. One thing I noticed that everytime a reference is made to any band/artist that played covers and eventually became successful it's usually from the 60/70s. This just got me wondering that are your cover lists mostly constituted of songs from the 60/70/80's with few occasional songs from the 90/00's? This is no way meant to be an offensive question. I'm just asking out of curiosity.
 
#582
I love the creation of the art, but the fact is this- 90% of mildly successful "original" bands are ONLY successful because they sound JUST LIKE what's on the radio. It's essentially a "style cover" and because it's the flavor of the week, they ride the wave. Do you remember the rush of original ska bands about 8-10 years ago? How many of them still exist? And how many of those are now back to playing ska covers?

Honestly, I'm not interested in hearing another band play their "original" song that sounds exactly like Korn or Plain White T's or All American Rejects... I do love the guys who actually play more original stuff, but GOOD and ORIGINAL music is hard to come by. Heck, they can't even find a lot of it to put on the radio!

So I figure... if you're going to play songs that SOUND like my favorite songs, why don't you just cut out the middle man and play my favorite songs instead?
 
#583
Implosion said:
Peanut butter = OK. Jelly = OK. Peanut butter + jelly = Barf.

And now to get back to horse beating. One thing I noticed that everytime a reference is made to any band/artist that played covers and eventually became successful it's usually from the 60/70s. This just got me wondering that are your cover lists mostly constituted of songs from the 60/70/80's with few occasional songs from the 90/00's? This is no way meant to be an offensive question. I'm just asking out of curiosity.
Click to expand...

That's because the kind of iconic popularity of bands that was typical back then doesn't seem to exist. I mean, are there any modern rock bands that are HUGE for YEARS? Album after album? It's so rare. Bands are popular for a year or something and then are never heard of again. Radio has become highly segmented. What is the most popular band in the world right now? U2 - which is a band of the early 80s. What was the biggest tour in 2007? The Police. What is the biggest tour in the last year? AC/DC -- a band really of the 70s!

That's where the market is. "big" almost doesn't happen for rock bands any longer -- not in the same way "big" was back in the 60s-late 80s.

And the other guy is right - there is nothing very "original" going on any more -- most bands are knock-offs of some other band. Everyone is doing "covers" in one way shape or form, unless you are a real fringe, artsy band like Porcupine Tree.
 
#586
ANYONE can slap unintelligible lyrics to a few bar chords and claim for themselves the mantel of "good" and the pillar of "integrity," but it takes real talent to faithfully cover songs of a variety of bands and styles! For example, saw a great cover band saturday night -- they went from Johnny Cash (in rockabilly style) straight into Marilyn Manson (Beautiful People). And they were fantastic. People went nuts.
 
#587
Dkerwood said:
I love the creation of the art, but the fact is this- 90% of mildly successful "original" bands are ONLY successful because they sound JUST LIKE what's on the radio.
Click to expand...

Art and commerce have always been two separate worlds that coexisted uneasily. There are two types of "original" bands- those that tailor their music to be mainstream with the hope of becoming successful, and those that just make whatever music they want to make. When I was in school in the late '80s, there were a lot of bands around playing REM-ish college rock or RHCP funk lite. After Nevermind came out, these bands bought Big Muffs, started wearing flannel and renamed themselves things like "Sludgemonster". For the rest of us, no change was required (except I had to stop wearing flannels for a few years).

Dkerwood said:
GOOD and ORIGINAL music is hard to come by. Heck, they can't even find a lot of it to put on the radio!
Click to expand...

"They" don't have any interest in putting "good and original" music on the radio. Radio is a business- why take a chance on something new when you can just use the same tired classic rock like everybody else and have guaranteed results? I don't agree with that philosophy, but that's been the concept behind rock radio for the last 20 years.

Dkerwood said:
So I figure... if you're going to play songs that SOUND like my favorite songs, why don't you just cut out the middle man and play my favorite songs instead?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Which is why Ryan Adams is a putz.
 
#588
QORC said:
ANYONE can slap unintelligible lyrics to a few bar chords and claim for themselves the mantel of "good" and the pillar of "integrity," but it takes real talent to faithfully cover songs of a variety of bands and styles!
Click to expand...

Indeed- just as anyone can bash out stale versions of the bar band classics, but it takes real talent to write good, original music. Your point is?
 
#589
Not that I expect this comment to matter, but I had probably the quintessential weekend with regard to this topic.

Friday night: Jam session with my band whose central focus is jam/improv where playing anything BUT the familiar (read "original/spontaneous") is the call.

Results: Four hours of very satisfying, gratifying music. The people who were there enjoyed it very much, felt enriched by the experience, and went home happy they came.

Saturday night: "Open rehearsal/recording session" with my band whose central focus includes playing covers. Many of which are "true to form" while others are "reinterpreted with our own take".

Results: Four hours of very satisfying, gratifying music. The people who were there enjoyed it very much, felt enriched by the experience, and went home happy they came.

So - I was fortunate enough to be allowed to spend over 8 hours between Friday evening and Sunday morning playing some of my favorite all-time cover tunes (some as you'd expect to hear them on the radio, others with the bands' collective interpretation of style and execution) and inventing what I consider to be some of the most gratifying "original/spontaneous" and "previously composed by us" music I can imagine.

I shudder to think how easily I could have closed the door on either of those opportunities by adhering to (IMO) the narrow view that one or the other of those situations held no value.
 
#590
This had no doubt been mentioned somewhere in the 30 pages of this thread, but my only problem with cover bands is that many of them play the same tunes. Brown Eyed Girl, Mustang Sally, etc. There are 2 here in town that I really like, partly because of their musicianship and partly because they pick songs the others won't touch.
 
#591
Man, this thread is back from the dead. Must have been Zombie Jesus day.

And regarding the most sucessful tours recently, there is a very obvious reason why bands like U2 and the Police consistantly rake in the cash: they charge $200 a tickets, and their fans are old enough, and their fans are old enough to afford them!

And if writting songs is so easy, I look forward to all of you cover band guy's CD of originals!
 
#594
Bass Viking said:
This had no doubt been mentioned somewhere in the 30 pages of this thread, but my only problem with cover bands is that many of them play the same tunes. Brown Eyed Girl, Mustang Sally, etc. There are 2 here in town that I really like, partly because of their musicianship and partly because they pick songs the others won't touch.
Click to expand...

To be fair - you don't have a problem with "cover bands" (a collective), you have a problem with a sampling of lackluster bands who cover a couple songs badly (a very small, and only somewhat representative sampling of that collective).

That's such a "cover band hater's cliche'". Simply having the awareness that some songs are covered almost ubiquitously by cover bands (ask yourself why sometime) then attaching your own subjective point of view about those bands who cover those tunes badly to all bands who play covers is a little unfair.

There are TONS of people who are making subjective, blanket statements that are entirely unfounded and unsupportable - yet they are sticking their sticks in the ground and dancing around the flag as if there's some reason to be proud of their narrow view of the music world.

"Yeah? - let's hear YOUR originals!"

"Yeah? - let's hear you cover Dream Theater!"

That's worthless.
 
#595
Well, cover bands are the only gig for players over 30 who aren't famous.
Nobody except kids supports up and coming bands playing their own music.
That's just the way it is.
T-Forty said:
I have a problem with cover/tribute bands.

I am in a new band who needs a guitarist to complete the line up and I feel as though we've exhausted every way to look for one. I go through online ads looking for a guitarist and for every 5 or so ads for a cover/tribute band there might be one actual musician/writer looking for a band.

This is me venting. Cover bands are worthless. Write your own music.
Click to expand...
 
#596
Yeah, very true. Although, everybody in my band is over 30, and we're getting a decent amount of support from a very tough Boston scene. Of course, most of that support is from people my own age (22) to 30. It would be very hard to make it as an original band when everybody is 30+ and looks it.
 
#597
Bassgrinder77 said:
Well, cover bands are the only gig for players over 30 who aren't famous.
Nobody except kids supports up and coming bands playing their own music.
That's just the way it is.
Click to expand...

Greyvagabond said:
Yeah, very true. Although, everybody in my band is over 30, and we're getting a decent amount of support from a very tough Boston scene. Of course, most of that support is from people my own age (22) to 30. It would be very hard to make it as an original band when everybody is 30+ and looks it.
Click to expand...

The only truth in these statements is for those who make such statements, these things will be true.
 
#599
Greyvagabond said:
It would be very hard to make it as an original band when everybody is 30+ and looks it.
Click to expand...

Depends on your definition of "make it". If that means getting a major label record deal and being hyped as the "next big thing" (for 15 minutes, until the next "next big thing") then no, you won't "make it" if you're over 30. However, I know several musicians over 30 who make a comfortable living playing original music- they aren't "rock stars," but they support themselves by touring and playing original music.

For me, wealth and fame was never why I took up music- I did it because I love it. Sure it'd be great to be a rock star, but I still enjoy writing songs and playing, even if I'm not playing stadiums.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back