Ness K Vs. Cover Bands

Ness K,

I'm glad you posted this because I think I'm one of the few on the other side of the fence. I'd much rather hear a bunch of nobody's playing a somebody's song vs a bunch of nobodys playing a bunch of nobody songs. Now I have heard orginal music played locally that wasn't bad but that is the exception rather than the rule. At least with a cover band I know what I'm getting when I go see them, plus if they sucked as a cover band they won't be around long anyway.

Now what I do hate are cover bands that don't play the songs correctly or they think they're smart and come up with some weird arrangement for a song I loved. To me if you're a cover band the whole premise is to play the songs they way they were written, but that's me. A know there's some leeway here but not much for me.

The going price around here in CT to see a cover band is usually about $5, not really a problem.

I always get this feeling that somehow there's something wrong if you play cover songs instead original music...why is that?

Personally alot of times I think people say that because they can't play anyone else's music. I play covers because personally it forces me to learn techniques I wouldn't necessarily have to learn if I were playing my own music.

I've read several bios about famous bands, where the guys in the band said they started writing their own songs because none of them were proficient enough on their instruments to play anyone else's.

Anyway I know that puts me in the minority but that's OK I like being there.

I completely agree with you, Cnev! I would much rather listen to a good cover band than some band that plays their very own, very bad music. I also, however, enjoy original music that is well done. Cover bands most definitely have their place. When people (non-musicians, for the most part) go out to a club/bar, they usually want to dance. And they usually want to hear/dance to songs that they already know. Therefore, you'll work more if you're decent cover band. Shoot, most blues players are doing covers and have been for decades! I know several wonderful songwriters, and wouldn't miss their shows for anything (with never a cover to be heard!). But you can't just arbitrarily say that "cover bands are dumb". Cover bands will always be here, and they will always be welcomed and appreciated, and they will always have their place in the entertainment industry.

IMHO

Wow Electra,

There's actually someone that feels similar to me, amazing, I feel sorry for you. I just want to qualify that I have nothing against original music like I said I've heard some amazing stuff but on average it's not usually as good to me as hearing some well played cover of a classic song.

Aren't orchestra's basically giant cover bands...I mean for the most part they are playing someone else's music note for note or am I missing something.

And even getting to play original music at clubs is getting more and more difficult because as Electra mentioned most people when they go out want to dance or hear music they are familiar with so it's difficult at times for original artists to get bookings at local clubs, in CT there are only certain clubs that tend to cater to original music most want cover bands because they make more money for the club.

Wow Electra,
There's actually someone that feels similar to me, amazing, I feel sorry for you.

LOL! :lol: I bet you're going to see that there are lots more of us with the same view! :D

I thought more people would agree with, oh BTW, that orchestra being giant cover bands thing is very true :)

I like to hear folks put their own spin on covers. Well done, of course.

I thought more people would agree with, oh BTW, that orchestra being giant cover bands thing is very true :)

Yes and no. Not in the sense that they robotically play exactly what is written -- not everything is written unambiguously into the orchestral score. One of the conductor's main responsibilities is to create an interpretation of a piece using the orchestra as his complex instrument and the score as a well-defined, but not absolutely rigid guideline. Different orchestras/conductors perform the same piece somewhat differently. Those differences may be subtle and nuanced, but can be what separate mediocre and brilliant performances.

Cover bands have their places. Example: Good ones are definitely a plus for dancing ... if they can nail a killer groove. But I expect some element of the personality of a band to come through in its covers. If not, why not just call in the Dr. MixmasterB DJ? Being a musician and performer is all about doing something with the material at hand. Consider: usually only one or two of a band actually writes the tunes. Are the rest of the band just interchangeable droids? -- essentially cover musicians themselves? Not usually. In a good band all the members work together, creating and arranging as they perform. It's an active synthesis, cover or not.

And I love good, original music. But it is not intrisically good or superior to covers.

Now consider all those "original" songs out there, and assume they are competently performed by the many "original" artists. I've concluded 95%+ of the tunes are not worth the listening time -- just mediocre dross. And I'm not just talking teen pop or Kenny G. There are just not that many gems. At least cover bands will have a better hit rate, as many of their tunes are tried and true, subject of course to their standards of taste. But again, if you are in that band, you better show me something you can do with that tune to make it you own. Always better? Maybe not, but at least worth a complete one-time listen. Give me a monster groove, an inspired but not stupidly indulgent solo, an emotional vocal, an unexpected arrangement -- something to makes me say "yeah, you get it!"

When I perform I do both. People like to hear something they recognize, They also then see that you are talented enough to perform someone else's work. It also shows versatility.

I like listening to bands playing songs I know - and yes, I do want to hear them played pretty much the way the original artist played them. When I'm in the pub for the jam nights, most people tend to play songs exactly the way they were written - that way you do at least know what's going on and can join in! I tend to play most covers that way - stay as close to the original as possible. However, if I'm doing a solo (and here's where CNev might disagree) I don't want to slavishly imitate the original solo note-for-note - I want it to be recognisable, but with a bit of me in it.

But what happens if you want to do a version of "I get by with a little help from my friends" for instance? Do you do it the way the Beatles did it? That's the original.....or do you do it the way Joe Cocker did it? For me, that version's miles superior...or the Wet Wet Wet version? Pretty close to the original.....or the Sam and Mark version? All of the last three versions made #1 in the UK singles chart. Then there's the Tori Amos version - or the Sergio Mendes version.....etc etc ad nauseam.

I think even major bands like U2 do a few cover versions - All Along The Watchtower, Helter Skelter for instance. If it's good enough for them, it should be good enough for us mere mortals!

:D :D :D

Vic

Hendrix covered All Along The Watchtower. He put his own spin on it, and I think he did it rather well.

Unless you are a real prolific writer, not playing covers kind of limits the repitoire don't it? I like covers, both exact copies and peoples own take on them. I like some cover versions better than the origionals.

Hendrix covered All Along The Watchtower. He put his own spin on it, and I think he did it rather well.

So well, in fact, that when Dylan plays the song these days he does the Hendrix version! Actually, there were a lot of bands who did Dylan covers back in the 60's and did them completely differently to Bob - Mr Tambourine Man by the Byrds and If You Gotta Go, Go Now by Manfred Mann. The cover versions are probably better known! (Well, at least to me - I didn't get into Dylan till I was about 20 or so....)

Then again, they were on a hiding to nothing - who else but Dylan could do a Dylan song like Dylan?

:D :D :D

Vic

What I really can't stand is when a band does a bad cover of it's own material . That is just WRONG ! The Rolling Stones sound horrendous performing their own material on every live recording I've heard them do . I love the Stones on record but live , they really sound bad .

I generally like the cover bands. I got into one band because of their Nirvana covers but ended up liking their originals too. Mostly because their originals share the same style as Nirvana. I went and saw one band called Collective Soul do a couple AC/DC covers, was awesome.

As Ricochet said, it's not just small local bands that do covers. I've heard Disturbed do Genesis, Killswitch Engage do Dio, Avril Lavigne do Bob Dylan. Also an awesome cover of Devil Went Down to Georgia appears in Guitar Hero III. I also heard the former Nightwish singer do Nirvana...................that one didn't work out so well.