What exactly does it mean to play "covers"

[jwilson67]

Well, I can tell you that my band will be playing Interstate Love Song and Plush tomorrow night in honor of Scott Weiland. These will definitely be note for note as we didn't rehearse them.

 

[999Brent]

when playing a cover we try to replicate the other instruments in the recording where possible, so it is not note for note but in the end sounds more like the original than if we play note for note.
I will also work melodies with the singer that are not in the original recording but helps with sing alongs and overall vibe.

 

[Honch]

Oh ,so the older Sting can't sing that high anymore and have to drop keys? OMG not a cover, or tribute, he's an original artist, and he can do whatever DaF*** with his own tunes as much as he like. Down to totally unrecognizable. Because, he can.

 

[Honch]

Have anyone of you nailed the tone and timbre of cover tune, and played it note for note live, and between sets someone in the audience approached you and accused you of playback?

 

[Honch]

And not to speak of everyone that thinks any cover by Bob Dylans is better than his own original...way better. Let's not go there... pretty OT, but if they got it note-for-note they would've be scolded.

 

[Pilgrim]

I'm not interested in playing anything note for note, because for one thing it's not always possible with the way a lot of music was engineered.

Play it so YOU like it, and remember: covers are music that people really LIKE!

 

[the yeti]

I could care less about changing keys, you have to accommodate your singer and almost no one in the crowd will notice.

agreed, but plenty of people get pretty upset about "violating the sanctity of the song" or some such bs... i think there was a thread that went on about just that few months ago even.

 

[engedi1]

Well, I can tell you that my band will be playing Interstate Love Song and Plush tomorrow night in honor of Scott Weiland. These will definitely be note for note as we didn't rehearse them.

Totally. I am adding these tunes back into my bands setlist for a while out of tribute.

 

[engedi1]

agreed, but plenty of people get pretty upset about "violating the sanctity of the song" or some such bs... i think there was a thread that went on about just that few months ago even.

I am more focused on changes to the song that the audience will notice. Only hardcore musicians will notice if you change keys, unless your singers is singing it like a 5th lower. But dropping down a half step or even a whole step is super common and doesn't seem to ruffle any feathers.

 

[pravus]

Do you think it is an improvement over Sting's bass part?

Is it improvement or expression that we are after? I vote expression.

 

[Max Blasto]

Didn't read the whole thread because this caught my eye - the feeling that reproducing "the original" can come out feeling wrong. I totally agree. In my view, there really is no such thing as "the original." There's just a particular recording of a particular version of the song that the producer or record company wound up deciding was the one they were going to focus on selling. Yes, it's probably the best-known version and the audience expects to hear something like it, but that's not the same thing as saying you need to play it note-for-note. If you listen to live versions of the same song by the same musicians, it turns out they often played it differently themselves once they got out on the road and found what worked and what didn't in a live setting. If the guys that first recorded it don't need to play it note-for-note, why should another band do so?

Also, often the instrumentation you have in a cover band is not exactly the same as what the original band had. If you had a 70s act with six or seven members and you're playing one of their songs in a power trio, you can't pick what just one of them played and reproduce that one part - you'll be missing huge elements of the song. You HAVE to ask how to play the song now, in THIS group, in front of THIS audience, that will make it work - not how to be a relic of one past version of the song that you've made a fetish of.

How very well said!

 

[Max Blasto]

To each their own. This cover doesn't do it for me. I mean, it is hard to cover the Police because who can sing like Sting? But I am also a believer in sticking to material that your singer can really do. I agree it's not a half-assed cover, they clearly put some thought into it, and I never said this one was in the half assed category. But we have all been to bars where the band clearly is just throwing a cover together and doesn't really know the parts and that is what I mean. There is a HUGE different in learning half of a song because your band can't be bothered to rehearse VS rewriting a song to suit your band. I may not love your arrangement, but I do respect the time involved. And the very best bands will own the arrangement and make it their own. Think of how great the Talking Heads version of Take me to the River is. Totally different from the original, which is also great of course. They own that song and I bet most people here the talking heads version in their head vs the Wilson Pickett when you mention that tune. I know I do. Johnny Cash's Version of Hurt also comes to mind as cover that is 100% different and equally or more awesome than the original.
But these are artists doing their thing, and I still feel most bar bands with the weekend party singalong crowd need to be faithful to the original when possible.

So you're saying that musicians playing in bars aren't artists?

 

[engedi1]

So you're saying that musicians playing in bars aren't artists?

I'm using artist here in the way that music industry people do, meaning a creator, or songwriter, or someone who does this professionally. And frankly, if some dude playing country covers in a bar referred to himself as an artist, I would probably have a hard time not laughing. I mean, I have spent the last ten years doing the same and I don't have such delusions of grandeur. I guess every 3rd grader who fingerpaints a sunflower is an "artist" if you want to use the broadest possible definition of the word, but I was talking about Sting, Johhny Cash and the Talking Heads. Does your bar band compare to them on the artistic front?
That being said, I am all about bringing as much 'artistic' sensibility to playing cover music as possible, which has been my point! Act like a pro! Act like you wrote the song and are proud of it and play your ass off with the correct parts that made that song go platinum. OR, completely rewrite it and make it something actually original, I would enjoy that too and respect the hours invested. Just don't download the effin chords from the interwebs and play the bare skeleton of the song and thing you are an "artist" I know you have seen plenty of bar bands do just that and don't like it either.

 

[engedi1]

There is a band here in Nashville that does a Allman Brother's tribute. They have two drummers, hammond organ with leslie speakers, vintage instruments, no corners are being cut. They NAIL the tunes and sound pretty much as good as the Allman's, especially with the vocal harmonies, and they get thousands of dollars per gig. I realize a tribute band is different than a cover band, but all cover bands should aspire to that level of professionalism if they want to land the better gigs, I think this is common sense.

 

[pravus]

I guess every 3rd grader who fingerpaints a sunflower is an "artist" if you want to use the broadest possible definition of the word, but I was talking about Sting, Johhny Cash and the Talking Heads.

I think it's interesting that you use "Hurt" as an example. I find Cash's version of that song to be utter garbage and I personally find absolutely zero artistic merit in it. I guess that means he wasn't an artist to me. Almost as if the person consuming the art gets to dictate what the art is. So no, 3rd graders aren't artists. Neither is Johnny Cash.

 

[zontar]

Now *this* is a cover version!

I was looking for this one to pop up

Just do it your own way--whatever that may be.

 

[JTE]

There is a band here in Nashville that does a Allman Brother's tribute. They have two drummers, hammond organ with leslie speakers, vintage instruments, no corners are being cut. They NAIL the tunes and sound pretty much as good as the Allman's, especially with the vocal harmonies, and they get thousands of dollars per gig. I realize a tribute band is different than a cover band, but all cover bands should aspire to that level of professionalism if they want to land the better gigs, I think this is common sense.

Now I find this really really funny. An ABB tribute that does exacting regurgitation of the ABB? But the heart of the REAL ABB is that collective improvisation and interactive jamming. So if the tribute band does "You Don't Love Me", does the guitarist who's impersonating Duane have to play that solo exactly like Duane did it one time that happened to get recorded for the Filmore album?

And therein lies the problem. Playing "like the record" begs the question of which recording? And just because Bill Wyman (or Keith) played this lick here on the take that became the original record, that doesn't mean that's what they really wanted. Keith once said that people should learn Stones' songs from live recordings because when they recorded the album they'd only known the song for a few days. After playing it live in front of people for a few months they had a better idea of what it should sound like. So if I cover "Honky Tonk Women", I don't always lay out of the verses, but approach it like Wyman did on "Get Your Ya Yas Out".

The key to a successful gig is playing music with the people on stage right now, making the song sound its best. And it's the SONG that is important. Never confuse "recording", "arrangement", nor "performance" with "song". The only people who really care that you played "Play That Funky Music..." dead on like the hit single edit they're familiar with are the musicians in the audience who aren't gigging.

 

[Max Blasto]

Now I find this really really funny. An ABB tribute that does exacting regurgitation of the ABB? But the heart of the REAL ABB is that collective improvisation and interactive jamming. So if the tribute band does "You Don't Love Me", does the guitarist who's impersonating Duane have to play that solo exactly like Duane did it one time that happened to get recorded for the Filmore album?

And therein lies the problem. Playing "like the record" begs the question of which recording? And just because Bill Wyman (or Keith) played this lick here on the take that became the original record, that doesn't mean that's what they really wanted. Keith once said that people should learn Stones' songs from live recordings because when they recorded the album they'd only known the song for a few days. After playing it live in front of people for a few months they had a better idea of what it should sound like. So if I cover "Honky Tonk Women", I don't always lay out of the verses, but approach it like Wyman did on "Get Your Ya Yas Out".

The key to a successful gig is playing music with the people on stage right now, making the song sound its best. And it's the SONG that is important. Never confuse "recording", "arrangement", nor "performance" with "song". The only people who really care that you played "Play That Funky Music..." dead on like the hit single edit they're familiar with are the musicians in the audience who aren't gigging.

Bingo. I've fired two guitarists in the last 4 years for not understanding the difference between "song" and "arrangement."

 

[zontar]

The only people who really care that you played "Play That Funky Music..." dead on like the hit single edit they're familiar with are [added words]some of [/added words] the musicians in the audience who aren't gigging.

Fixed--because I don't care.

 

[jmlee]

My favourite cover band over the years was Dread Zeppelin: reggae Led Zep covers with an Elvis impersonator as the front man. Lots more on YouTube.