Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
What is an iconic guitar solo that should be played note for note?
- Thread starter 51PRI
- Start date
The Cars, "Just What I Needed." A short but cool solo
Great, just what I needed after thinking I had made the best song selection already.
I'm of the opinion that every single Dimebag solo should be played note for note, but apparently Zakk Wylde disagrees.
Thanks! Actually, for that particular song what I would do is eliminate the parts of it that make it sound less commercial than it could sound. Kinda like a song you hear on a commercial on TV and then you find it on YT and listen to it and you realize that the part they used on the commercial was the best, and likely only good, part of the song. I've had that happen so many times.
This is one that is being used in a Wal-Mart commercial right now:
They use the best part of the song.
Why not? There are plenty of cover versions that are empirically (e.g. preferred by more people as evidenced by higher sales/chart peak position, lasting popularity or wider public recognition) 'better' than the original writers' version. It seems a bit far-fetched that none of the contributors here have the ability to come up with or have a hand in such a thing. There are bound to be some - who are any of us to assume the OP isn't one of them?
Not buying it. Different, sure. Better? Nope. Higher sales, preferred by more people, etc...doesn't make a cover version "better". A finished song is a work of art. It, hopefully, fulfills the vision the writer wanted to convey. Oh. Just in case...IMO.
There's an entire songwriting industry where songwriters shop their songs to producers, labels, and artists to realize into a finished product. Those writers are not releasing the "best" finished song. They make demos so they can sell the song, and those songs are no different than covers when any artist who didn't write them releases their own versions of them.
That wasn't the case in the song being discussed. I'm aware of the pro-writer selling songs…the Brill Building and so on. Even in some of those cases though there are definitive versions but those are obviously open to more interpretation. I just have a problem with someone saying they can "better" a song they had nothing to do with. I think it's ballsy to admit you think you can do it when , with all due respect, he never has before and thinks he can do it at this stage of the game. So, yeah.
It's not all that rare for a cover version to surpass a song's original recording. These things are of course matters of taste, so disputes about that in any individual case are to be expected ... but there are a lot of examples.
One notable example would be "Twist and Shout" by the Beatles - a lot of people figure they wrote it, but they were, I believe, covering the Isley's version, which was itself a cover of an earlier release.
Or there's Aretha's version of "Respect", a cover of Otis Redding's lesser known original. Many., many more. A common enough occurrence that it's always gonna be reasonable to consider it possible. Not hubris, just history.
Why not?
China Girl: Bowie or Iggy? OK they were co-writers, but the basic source material - lyrics, melody and harmonic framework - were the same.
Hallelujah: Leonard Cohen, Alexandra Burke, Lucy Thomas or Jeff Buckley?
Mad World: Tears for Fears or Gary Jules?
All Along the Watchtower: Dylan or Hendrix?
Ray Davies, probably one of the most covered writers, has suggested part of the reward of writing and releasing songs is what can happen to them once 'in the wild' and beyond your contro, and of being excited at the prospect of where others might take the songs. Sounds like a ringing endorsement of anyone prepared to put their neck on the block and have a go.
IMHO
Doing the lead break differently would be like the singer making up their own melody and/or words. I know a guitarist that doesn't try to get anywhere near the break as done before. He twiddles as fast as he can, whatever the speed the band's playing at, and in the wrong key.
I agree. I've come to accept, NOT like but accept, that our lead guitarist just will not play signature licks on the songs we cover, never mind signature solos. I personally agree with you that the signature licks on songs, including but not limited to guitar licks, are just as important as the words and melody...UNLESS you are doing something new and unique with the song.
