Playing note for note.

[dvh]

... to faithfully reproduce the original music.

This is the crux of it for me. Where did this need for "faithful reproduction" come in? Especially since we're primarily dealing with popular music (i.e., not classical - a whole different animal).

It's an odd requirement of some that is connected to the rock and pop boom that began in the 60's. Though I find it inexplicable I think I can understand people's desire to hear a live band replicate the songs they love and listened to a hundred or more times through the radio and on the stereo. It's a familiarity that is comfortable, validating, and nostalgic. (I blame laziness on the listener's part.)

But, for me, it's unnecessary. I'd rather just hear music played well, and, if a band has the chops to pull off what is essentially a tribute version, those same chops should allow them to do their own successful version. If they can't, that's where the laziness comes in....

 

[GRAHAM SG1]

Does anyone play covers of covers, sometimes (IMO) the covers of covers are better than covers of the original song, take The Who`s `Summertime Blues` or The Clash `I fought the law`, to someone with a hard rock leaning, these versions will be preferable .
I definitely dont play all songs note for note, being the bass and singer makes it a struggle to get right .

 

[etoncrow]

I would be willing to bet anyone who is playing "Too Hard to Handle" is doing a cover of a cover because Otis Redding did it first....or maybe the Black Crows covered the Grateful Dead's cover of Otis Redding...dept. of redundancy dept.

Otis Redding - Hard To Handle - YouTube

Invalid Link Removed

 

[MegaSwing]

I would be willing to bet anyone who is playing "Too Hard to Handle" is doing a cover of a cover because Otis Redding did it first....or maybe the Black Crows covered the Grateful Dead's cover of Otis Redding...dept. of redundancy dept.

Otis Redding - Hard To Handle - YouTube

Invalid Link Removed

+1

Actually that lack of awareness on the part of many fan bases really pisses me off sometimes. Even well-intentioned covers contaminate the spirit of the original more often than they distill it into something finer.

 

[JohnMCA72]

I don't find audiences want songs note for note...they just want them to sound good.

...and what sounds "good" to an audience varies from one member of that audience to the next besides being completely different from what may sound "good" to you or any other musician.

I don't know how many times I've had people come up to me & tell me I "sounded great!" after what I thought was a terrible performance. I've had to smile and act gracious while seething inside over how badly I "sucked". What stuck in my mind may have been all the bad notes, wrong notes, tone that wasn't what I wanted, missed cues, etc. but nobody in the audience saw or remembered any of that.

If people were really interested in hearing music played faithfully, note-for-note, exactly as originally recorded, they'd just play the jukebox & not bother with all the messing-around that comes with a live band. But they're not, & what they really are interested in has very little to do with music at all. If we can recognize this, we can give them what they want. If we give them what they want, they'll be eager to pay us and invite us back again.

 

[LiquidMidnight]

But, for me, it's unnecessary. I'd rather just hear music played well, and, if a band has the chops to pull off what is essentially a tribute version, those same chops should allow them to do their own successful version. If they can't, that's where the laziness comes in....

...but as I said earlier in this thread, I think it's genre-specific. Giving your own twist to Hoochie Coochie Man is not only alright, but it's probably expected. Giving your own twist to, say a Nickelback or Three Doors Down tune, often just sounds like you don't have the chops or patience to actually replicate the song...unless you truly are doing a complete rearranagement (anyone want to hear a rumba version of Kryptonite? ).

 

[king_biscuit]

It depends on the song. Cult of Personality and YYZ have to be played note for note, Mustang Sally and Papa's Got a Brand New Bag, not so much.

 

[AQUANOVA]

I am thinking cool, I can play without putting in a lot of time.

There's you problem right there.

 

[LiquidMidnight]

It depends on the song. Cult of Personality and YYZ have to be played note for note,

Ironic, considering that Vernon Reid seems to never actually play Cult of Personality note for note. We cover that song, and my guitarist does do both of the guitar solos in that song note for note, trem bar pyrotechnics and all. I commented a few weeks ago that it's funny he plays it the same just like the record, every night, but the dude who wrote it plays something different every time he plays it.

There are actually videos on Youtube of Vernon Reid giving a lesson on how to play the song, and he often forgets how it's played. *lol*

 

[ChrisB2]

How a top band plays their own song or covers someone else's song really isn't relevant to how a cover band should play a song.

Most people listening to a cover band expect to hear the song as it sounds on the radio, whereas people at a top band's concert are going to be a lot more accepting of a different version.

IMO.

Practically everyone knows (or will at least recognize) certain parts to a lot of radio hit songs -- lead parts, drum parts, bass parts, lyrics, etc. A big name act can change whatever they want, they're playing to their fans and their fans are cool with that. But a cover band is playing to the public, and if they change something it's "wrong," at least to a lot of people. It is to me, anyway.

P.S. Imagine a cover band half-way through a popular song, and taking off with a whole new verse that they wrote, complete with a new chord progression and tempo. Wha? Huh? Not okay?? I thought we can change stuff around?

 

[dvh]

P.S. Imagine a cover band half-way through a popular song, and taking off with a whole new verse that they wrote, complete with a new chord progression and tempo. Wha? Huh? Not okay?? I thought we can change stuff around?

I would actually find that interesting. Different strokes....

 

[BassyBill]

Whilst I'm not as big a fan as some other folks here on TB, changing stuff around certainly seems to have worked for Dirty Loops.

 

[lfmn16]

P.S. Imagine a cover band half-way through a popular song, and taking off with a whole new verse that they wrote, complete with a new chord progression and tempo. Wha? Huh? Not okay?? I thought we can change stuff around?

This is a ridiculous scenario. There is a lot of ground between not playing note for note and inserting your own song into a cover song. It really has nothing to do with anything. How about if I put a carrot in the middle of a song.

 

[king_biscuit]

Ironic, considering that Vernon Reid seems to never actually play Cult of Personality note for note. We cover that song, and my guitarist does do both of the guitar solos in that song note for note, trem bar pyrotechnics and all. I commented a few weeks ago that it's funny he plays it the same just like the record, every night, but the dude who wrote it plays something different every time he plays it.

There are actually videos on Youtube of Vernon Reid giving a lesson on how to play the song, and he often forgets how it's played. *lol*

We are talking about bass lines, not guitar solos. I'll bet Wimbish plays it the same way every night, and I'll bet Skillings did too.

 

[derg]

i make a distinction between a copy band and a cover band. to me... a copy band is just that - it will try to duplicate the exact sound of the material being covered. A cover band doesn't... it make base the arrangement on the original but make also incorporate other versions in addition to other original aspects into their performance of the songs.

 

[DBCrocky]

Imagine a cover band half-way through a popular song, and taking off with a whole new verse that they wrote, complete with a new chord progression and tempo. Wha? Huh? Not okay?? I thought we can change stuff around?

The bands I like do this kind of stuff all the time. Don't you get bored listening to the exact same version over and over again?

A band named the Disco Biscuits put all there songs on a "Wheel of Fortune" type wheel. They would someone in the audience come up and spin the next song, then they would improvise a transition from their current song to the new song. They've done entire sets like this without stopping.

Didn't Kid Rock put his own lyrics to Werewolves of London, with a Sweet Home Alabama chorus? That seemed to go over pretty well.

 

[dave_p]

so its not a good thing when we do a little sex machine placed somewhere in our cover of the baker brothers cover of fly like an eagle?

 

[ErikW]

Does anyone play covers of covers, sometimes (IMO) the covers of covers are better than covers of the original song, take The Who`s `Summertime Blues` or The Clash `I fought the law`, to someone with a hard rock leaning, these versions will be preferable .
I definitely dont play all songs note for note, being the bass and singer makes it a struggle to get right .

We play a cover of a cover of Tom Petty's Mary Jane's Last Dance. I Like the Lind, Nilsen, Fuentes, Holm version much better. It is more lively.

 

[BassyBill]

Covers of covers...

We play "Don't you worry 'bout a thing" based on the Incognito version rather than the Stevie Wonder original. Also the EWF version of "Got to get you into my life" (not the Beatles version) and Bowie/Jagger style "Dancing in the street" (not Martha and the Vandellas). Much to my annoyance, we do the Nerina Pallot version of "Peg" even though the Steely Dan original is one of my favourite tunes of all time.

If I think of any more I'll come back!

 

[etoncrow]

Classic cover of a cover: Elvis doing Big Mama Thorton's "Hound Dog"

edit: Elvis did a cover of Freddy Bell's cover of Big Mama Thorton.