Being a Cover Band is EASIER than being an all original band...agree or disagree?

[New Trail]

Our new band started out as a cover band and has developed into probably a 60/40 originals/covers band. Right now we probably have 5 new originals that are in various stages of development. It seems to take us a LOT longer to finish (to our satisfaction) an original versus learning a cover. Just an observation, I guess!

 

Thoughts?

[Lee Knight]

Are you a Mac or a PC? Ford or Chevy? Gay or Straight? Hip Hop or Rock? Donkey or Elephant?

[Austincowbell]

by definition being in an original band is easier because you can't play an original song and have an audience member tell you it's "wrong".

[TrickyBoy]

From a musical standpoint, an original band is generally judged by their songwriting, while a cover band is judged based on their ability to reproduce someone else's work. Very different skills IMO.

[Vito Corleone]

Apples and oranges.

[New Trail]

 

...an original band is generally judged by their songwriting, while a cover band is judged based on their ability to reproduce someone else's work.....

 

 

That's a good point! I had never really thought of it quite that way. A cover band that accurately recreates other people's songs would likely have greater success than an original band that writes poor quality songs, no matter how good the original band's players are?

[guitarguy19]

Apples and oranges.

 

 

Different goals altogether...for the most part of course.

[Lee Knight]

 

Apples and oranges.

 

 

Are you an apple or an orange?

[musicmanmu]

 

From a musical standpoint, an original band is generally judged by their songwriting, while a cover band is judged based on their ability to reproduce someone else's work. Very different skills IMO.

 

 

But both are judged on their showmanship.

[Vito Corleone]

 

That's a good point! I had never really thought of it quite that way. A cover band that accurately recreates other people's songs would likely have greater success than an original band that writes poor quality songs, no matter how good the original band's players are?

 

 

Yes. With an original band, songwriting is the key. How many hits have been recorded by {censored}ty bands but were successful because the song was good/catchy/quirky? It's rock n roll. Nobody cares how great the players are or are not when a song comes on the radio.

 

Cover band players don't necessarily have to be good either if they can lock into that same vibe that works for successful original bands, but for the most part, yes, you need competent-to-good players for a cover band to be successful.

[Lee Knight]

I did both separately and concurrently. They both have their share of ecstatic peaks and their soul sucking troughs. What's harder? Working. Working's harder.

 

It's awesome having someone say, "Hey, there's that bass player with ___ signed to ____." But it sucks traveling in a van and eating uncooked Top Raman.

 

It's awesome getting a decent paycheck. It sucks playing songs you don't like to disinterested people.

 

It's awesome having a packed dance floor. It's sucks hearing "FREEBIRD!!!!" shouted at you.

 

It's awesome being on MTV in '83 in low rotation. It's sucks it only lasted 4 weeks.

[dparr]

Being in an original band is MUCH easier.

 

You don't have to learn other peoples parts. styles and techniques.

[MikeyParent]

 

From a musical standpoint, an original band is generally judged by their songwriting, while a cover band is judged based on their ability to reproduce someone else's work. Very different skills IMO.

 

This

[TrickyBoy]

 

But both are judged on their showmanship.

 

 

Absolutely, but the OP was more about working up new songs, hence my response. But in a live setting, the show is still a VERY important part of how a band is judged - covers and originals

[Nijyo]

Both are hard to do right, just in different ways.

[Vito Corleone]

 

Absolutely, but the OP was more about working up new songs, hence my response.

 

 

Just....depends....

 

With a good original rock band, you've usually got this formula thing going on where everyone just falls into their roles and the songs just sort of arrange themselves after a certain point. Once the basics of the songs were written I don't think it probably took all that long for the Ramones or Journey or Green Day to work out the arrangements and get the songs to the point where they could be played live or recorded. In that case, cover tunes might be more difficult because of dealing with the various styles.

 

Then again....if you have good players in your cover band, everyone can pretty much work on their individual parts (or not) and show up to rehearsal (or even the gig) and get the song sounding good on the first take.

 

Now, on the other hand, when I've been in original bands that DIDN'T have a "sound" or formula worked out, and the songwriting wasn't that strong, then working up new originals was a VERY long a laborious process.

[3shiftgtr]

Cover band is way way way way way way easier.

 

In order for a song to get heard, it needs to be written, rehearsed, and recorded first. It came out of thin air, to become a thing you can hear. And that takes a lot of work. Which is done for you in a cover band. No collaboration. No mix down. No mastering approval. No getting your tunes covered by a PRO. Or copywritten. No pre production meetings to decide how you want the tunes to sound. You don't have to do what it takes to make the music appear out of thin air.

 

In an original band, you have to make people care about music that didn't exist before you played it for them. In a cover band, you are playing music that exists and some one else other than you made it popular. As a cover band musician, you are riding the efforts of those who made it popular. You are cashing in on its popularity. Which you did not work to achieve. Ideally, a original band is doing that work constantly.

 

Think of the amount of collaboration and work it takes for a tune written, produced and promoted well enough to be popular and good enough to be considered by a cover band. That is a lot of work that cover bands don't have to do.

 

Yes cover bands have to work hard. To perform and promote. Just like original bands. But original bands have to do all the work BEFORE the tunes even get to the cover band. And that is a lot.

 

Now if your talking about a band that writes some tunes, makes one at a time copies on their computer, and plays 3 gigs a year on some random tuesday night at a local {censored}hole to their 5 friends, then you might have a point.

[RupertB]

The answer will be different for each individual as the process of writing songs comes more easily to some, particularly those who have worked on the craft.

 

I know guys for whom the effort of writing a song is comparable to preparing a meal. For others, including me, writing originals can be difficult & time consuming.

[Dancebass]

It all depends on you. I think playing the spoons looks pretty simple. Being the worlds greatest spoon player on the other hand, TOTALLY DIFFERENT!!

[Vito Corleone]

Now if your talking about a band that writes some tunes, makes one at a time copies on their computer, and plays 3 gigs a year on some random tuesday night at a local {censored}hole to their 5 friends, then you might have a point.

 

What the OP was talking about (as I read it anyway) was simply the process of working the songs up in order for them to be performed well on stage.

 

Recording, mixing, promoting, etc are all other things entirely unrelated to working up the songs. For all we know, the OP has no intention of recording the tunes at all.

[KeysBear]

not at all easier. I would say that based upon the local scene cover bands work four times as often and for much longer hours per show. Places that showcase originals bands have them do one or two sets and usually provide the PA. As far as prep work goes, to me those original songs can't possibly take more than five minutes to write and rehearse. It's all about the look and the sound anyway, the message isn't that important.

[callous]

I generally struggle to learn and play somebody else's songs.

 

My own songs flow out easily, and I never forget any parts. But are my songs any good; does anyone really care to hear them?

[New Trail]

 

...My own songs flow out easily, and I never forget any parts. But are my songs any good; does anyone really care to hear them?

 

 

Positive, hopefully positive, feedback from the other band members is what I'm looking for for the songs I write. If THEY like them, then I will follow thru and finish and push a song. If I sense that they don't like a song then I'll pull it...

[rodclement]

Whatever you do, just don't pull the "bait n' switch" bringing people in to hear some covers and dance, just to sneak in some originals that no one knows in there! That drives me crazy!

Be one or the other and be happy with it, I don't think one is tougher than the other, just different things to do, but I do admire songwriters!

 

Rod

[BATCAT]

It's not really an answerable question; it raises many others and there aren't really good standards for comparison. Learning a song you're going to cover and and writing a song are two totally different things. And if you're in an original band but don't write the songs, it's not much different from learning a cover.

 

 

As far as prep work goes, to me those original songs can't possibly take more than five minutes to write and rehearse.

 

 

Boy, I wish that was the case.