• 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.

The Official Covers vs Originals Thread

Original vs. Copy

  • I rather play with an original band.

    Votes: 84 46.9%

  • I rather play with a copy/cover band.

    Votes: 42 23.5%

  • It doesn’t matter.

    Votes: 53 29.6%
  • Total voters
    179
Status
Not open for further replies.
#181
bunkaroo said:
Well I would never argue that a large percentage of original bands are crap. Too many are in a rush to play out and will "write" the same song 10 times to make a set.

What you're describing about your interpretations I would describe more as a "remake" than a cover. That may very well work fine for what you're playing. Most of the audiences I've seen and played to with covers wanted to hear the song as close to the recording as possible. I might add my own personal flares here and there, but I'm not going to rewrite the bass line to "Livin' on a Prayer" - that's an integral part of the song and people expect to hear what they recognize.
Click to expand...

I am in the camp that is highly suspect of what the audience knows about bands and music or what they want to hear.

I'll give them this, they know ( at least the women) they want a beat they can dance to. But that's about it.

We do Buddy Miles " Them Changes" . I don't play the bass line anything like the recording. I use all closed strings and play a syncopated funk groove playing the alternative notes to what the guitarist are playing.

I love Billy Cox, but for some reason the bass line in his recording wasn't working for me.

Blue
 
#184
I agree. my philosophy with cover bands has always been "why not just listen to the real artist?" granted usually the real artist is not available live, but a band that only covers another certain band just feels like a carbon copy of the other band, but significantly worse. Also, there is no chance of a record deal or anything like that. Go write your own songs, people!
 
#185
pushbuttonfour said:
I agree. my philosophy with cover bands has always been "why not just listen to the real artist?" granted usually the real artist is not available live, but a band that only covers another certain band just feels like a carbon copy of the other band, but significantly worse. Also, there is no chance of a record deal or anything like that. Go write your own songs, people!
Click to expand...

Oh, youre in for it now!
 
#186
pushbuttonfour said:
I agree. my philosophy with cover bands has always been "why not just listen to the real artist?" granted usually the real artist is not available live, but a band that only covers another certain band just feels like a carbon copy of the other band, but significantly worse. Also, there is no chance of a record deal or anything like that. Go write your own songs, people!
Click to expand...

I can't write songs and have no interest in a record deal.

When I go to see a cover band I am going to see the band and how they handle their act.

So your saying all cover bands are significantly worse than the original recordings?


Tell you what, come to Milwaukee and I'll take you out to several originals band clubs, then we can discuss the topic of "worse" and song quality.

Blue
 
#189
pushbuttonfour said:
I agree. my philosophy with cover bands has always been "why not just listen to the real artist?" granted usually the real artist is not available live, but a band that only covers another certain band just feels like a carbon copy of the other band, but significantly worse. Also, there is no chance of a record deal or anything like that. Go write your own songs, people!
Click to expand...
Yeah. It's like your signature says - you sure do know how to avoid being popular.
 
#191
bluewine said:
No it's not and never will be.

At the end of the day Milwaukee is a " Don't Stop Believing " city.

Blue
Click to expand...

Well your arguments consistently use your experiences in a small midwestern city as a way of assessing the rest of the country and stating how things should be. You'll note I frequently use caveats in my posts that things may be different in different areas.

And this is not to say there aren't good bands there because I'm sure there are. I'm sure there are good original bands in the Milwaukee area that rarely gig. Or maybe they just don't gig around there - Chicago is close enough for original bands who are serious about getting exposure.
 
#193
bunkaroo said:
Well your arguments consistently use your experiences in a small midwestern city as a way of assessing the rest of the country and stating how things should be. You'll note I frequently use caveats in my posts that things may be different in different areas.

And this is not to say there aren't good bands there because I'm sure there are. I'm sure there are good original bands in the Milwaukee area that rarely gig. Or maybe they just don't gig around there - Chicago is close enough for original bands who are serious about getting exposure.
Click to expand...


No, my arguments use my knowledge of the Milwaukee local music scene as away of assessing the Milwaukee scene. It's why I use caveats like " in Milwaukee "

There are some awesome originals bands in Milwaukee, but not many.

Blue
 
#194
bluewine said:
No, my arguments use my knowledge of the Milwaukee local music scene as away of assessing the Milwaukee scene. It's why I use caveats like " in Milwaukee "

Blue
Click to expand...

OK sure. I'll be sure to remember that next time I see one of your posts telling people how it is and how it should be. They should all now contain the postscript * in Milwaukee.
 
#195
My originals band from Milwaukee does WI, IL, IA, MN, IN, MI, MO...we go where the (weekend) gigs are. We do festivals, clubs, bars, and get played regularly around the world on podcasts, internet radio stations, Pandora, etc. It's a smaller world these days, and this originals bands from Milwaukee still does 50 odd gigs per year. We've even won a few awards over the years.

You just need to work harder to get your music out there if you want to compete with the cover bands. It's easier doing covers - yes, I know this from experience. You do not have to sell the music when doing covers. The original artist(s) already did. You just have to worry about the show.

In short, the experience is what you make it. We write because we love it, we play whenever we can because we love it, but its not a career.

We use lots of chords too - more than 2 or 3! And not just in E.

And for the most part, we try not to suck.

Milwaukee has lots of good originals bands, just like most towns. It just depends how hard you look to find them, and how hard they work. Check out The Form. Outstanding Milwaukee band. Great Lakes Drifters...Whiskeybelles...Mr Deagun Jones...lots of good bands if you want to find them.
 
#196
bluewine said:
I can't write songs and have no interest in a record deal.

When I go to see a cover band I am going to see the band and how they handle their act.

So your saying all cover bands are significantly worse than the original recordings?


Tell you what, come to Milwaukee and I'll take you out to several originals band clubs, then we can discuss the topic of "worse" and song quality.

Blue
Click to expand...

I do think that, 99 times out of 100, I would rather listen to a "real" album from the actual band than a cover album of the exact same songs. And I would say that most cover bands you hear are probably worse than the original... I mean think about it, of course the original is better, because the people who made it are professionals and got famous off their talent.

I'm all for bands that cover a wide range of songs, but bands that simply cover one other band seem rather limiting to me. That said, I realize many people can't or don't want to write their own songs, and covering songs from bands you like is fun. I just dislike the idea of a band limiting itself to only one other band.
 
#198
pushbuttonfour said:
I do think that, 99 times out of 100, I would rather listen to a "real" album from the actual band than a cover album of the exact same songs. And I would say that most cover bands you hear are probably worse than the original... I mean think about it, of course the original is better, because the people who made it are professionals and got famous off their talent.

I'm all for bands that cover a wide range of songs, but bands that simply cover one other band seem rather limiting to me. That said, I realize many people can't or don't want to write their own songs, and covering songs from bands you like is fun. I just dislike the idea of a band limiting itself to only one other band.
Click to expand...

I take it you have never heard a top notch cover or tribute band?

I've been lucky enough to have seen many great originals bands and cover bands in Milwaukee.

Blue
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back