Covers (How should they be played?)

[Outkaster]

Originally posted by Tedster The answer is "Yes". Should it sound exactly like the album? Yes...depending on the song...if you are a tribute band. But realize that even the original band performing the work seldom did the song exactly the same night after night. Unless there's some guitar solo that has to be played verbatim more or less. Should you take some leeway? Yes...depending on the song, and if you are just about anything else than a tribute band. One good thing to keep in mind about covers is to pretend that you're recording it for your own album and putting a new twist on it. Like UB40 doing a reggae version of Elvis' "I Can't Help Falling In Love". (Not my favorite cover or song by a longshot, but an excellent example of putting your own twist on something).

 

 

Good post.

[daddymack]

Having been in and out of cover bands for over thirty years, I categorically refuse to be a human jukebox anymore. If the audience wants to hear songs the way they were originally done, pay the juke, and don't go to see live music.
This is the reason I have a strong dislike for 'tribute bands' as well. If all you are doing is repetitive mimicry, do it once, shoot a video and be done.

Music is art. Would I buy a cheap copy of a Picasso, when I can get lithos of the original? Would I buy the CD of a cover band that sounds exactly like the original?

Take a song and make something out of it, bring something new to it.

[d. gauss]

>

quietly.

-d. gauss

[arellspencer]

 

Originally posted by brophyd I've been playing keys in a band for a while now (1 year+). We play mostly covers with a few originals in each set. We only have a Guitar/Singer, Bass, Keys (Me), and Drummer. My question is this: When it comes to playing covers, should they be played exactly like the recording, or should the band take it and make it it's own (playing what sounds good)? Uniqueness? Thoughts?

 

 

when I do a cover it's so I can make some greenbacks offen it.

If the folkes listenin' are put off by my arrangement then I have fokked it up. But if the folkes go ga,ga ovre it then I have done my job well.

For instance a stones tune titled BROWN SUGAR.

a goode song but veddy tough to do as a three piece. I have to incorporate two guitar parts and the bass parts in my arrangement. So after I study the tune i have to make it sound exactly like the original recording and with me doing two guitar parts at the same time, plus the bass parts the bassist drops at the same time, PLUS the vocals; usually lead vocals all rolled into an arrangement I can remember.

So I'm learning two guitar parts, plus bass(note for note) PLUS all the lead vocal line.

then I arrange it so one guy can play the parts which HAVE TO be in the song so it sounds like the original.

NOW keefer tunes his axe oddly and leaves strangs off and so I have to WORK to make it sound goode.

othre bands come to watch when I play out. I was once tolde by someone who I felt was a much better player than I, that my version was the best version he had ever heard.

All I did was make it like the original.

Same way with a BLACK SABBATH TUNE TITLED: PARANOID

I studied randys versions and as many of tonys versions as i could finde and did a cross between all of the different versions. I put my own guitar leads to it but I had studied the song so much that I had the essence of the tune down and made it "my own" song. needless to say, it went ovre very well.

if it ain't broke DON'T fix it.

I did a tune titled: LAST KISS

I changed a lot of stuff in that one but kept the essence of the song so even though it was a very different(electric) arrangement I kept the very heart of the song and folkes thought it was great, I just did my version my way to suit me. ..

oh I was doing my version way before P.J.. I still feel THEY ripped me off. aahahahahah! my version sounds better.. even if I must say so myself.

 

[tucktronix]

Here's my take...

I've played in several cover bands, depending upon anyone's definition of a cover band. I play in a blues band and the tunes we play are all covers, so I guess that would count as a cover band.

In my experience, the audience recognizes a song by the main hook, beginning riff or chorus. For example, the beginning guitar riff to "Brown-Eyed Girl" is instantly recognizable to a lot of people. I'm sure that a lot of people in this forum inderstands that there is a great deal of energy during a live gig and the tempo is usually a bit faster. When you're going thru a lot of cover songs in a set, trying to play the material exactly like the recording is impractical. Let's face it, chances are that the audience is not going to recognize that little, barely audible keyboard or guitar part, or much less care. I think that the situation is different if you are in a "tribute" band, where every nuance is played.

[KeysBear]

Well, to answer your question, I don't play covers exactly like the originals. I play them better.
I'll start with our Doors tribute band. When I first joined the band as a keyboard player I took my CD player to McDonalds and sat there with a coffee listening to Light My Fire about 50 times. I didn't want to sit at the keyboard and pick it out note for note. I had about four days to learn two sets of Doors material and I wanted to find Manzarek's style. After learning the first six songs I felt like I could Manzarek-ize just about any song. He rarely played the same passage the same way twice. It's a frame of mind.
I've done the same thing with Santana, Pink Floyd, Deep Purple, and the Stones. I've created keyboard parts for Satisfaction and You Can't Always Get What You Want that are rhythmically complementary to the guitar parts and sound like they should have been on the original recordings. I just don't see any point to playing covers unless you take it up a level.

[sventvkg]

Cop the general vibe and get all the main riffs but put your own thing into it. This is what I do and everyone seems to love it. We used to learn all the journey styx, Yes, Kansas, Genesis, etc etc note for note coming up...I dont' regret it because it develops your ears and chops but nowadays I do it my way..

[KeysBear]

Originally posted by sventvkg Cop the general vibe and get all the main riffs but put your own thing into it. This is what I do and everyone seems to love it. We used to learn all the journey styx, Yes, Kansas, Genesis, etc etc note for note coming up...I dont' regret it because it develops your ears and chops but nowadays I do it my way..

What he said.

[MrKnobs]

Originally posted by Hardtailed My opinion as always been: if the audience wants to hear a perfect rendition of the CD, they will stay home and listen to the damn CD!!!

 

 

If you can't do a version of the song that is substantially different and better than the original, then let the Juke Box do a perfect version.

 

Terry D>

[Crypticscott]

I've always tried to put my own spin on them.

[Jazzguru]

One of the advantages of playing in a jazz/blues group is that you never do play a tune the same way twice esp the solo - we are always listening to each other and ffeeding off what we hear.

[worthyjoe]

Originally posted by Cortfan We do covers pretty close to the original, considering we are only a 4 piece band. Lead, bass, drums, and part time keys. Even original recorded songs are usually way over produced with racks full of effects, vocalizers, symphonies, choirs, etc. How do you expect a "bar band" to duplicate that? I can play most basslines note for note, and the guitarist can play really close to the original leads, even though he can improvise a lead for just about any song, and make it sound good. We get the basic feel of the song and just play it similar to a live version. I think our vocals save us (even though I don't sing) and keep our cover songs a good interpretation of the original recorded version, or should I say "live version".

 

 

That's a good point about vocals. My band takes a lot of liberties instrumentally with covers (we often simplify the songs) but I always try to keep the vibe and cadence of the original vocals and I think that helps keep the "spirit" of the song.

[Fxrs]

Originally posted by KeysBear What he said.

This is absolutely true. I went to see the band I'm in now cause my stepbrother-in-law plays bass, both guitarists were terrible! Not that I'm good, but my point is, after a complete and total butchering of "Breakdown" by Tom Petty, 1 guy goes up to the "lead" guitarist and tells him how he "owned!" that song. Meanwhile I'm looking around to see if anyone else has the shocked and frightened look on their face that I have! After a few cocktails, noone gives a {censored} how authentic it is as long as they can recognize the song. By the way, both guitarists in the band still suck, just now I'm one of them! It's fun, and I'm getting older so if I'm gonna do it, it's now or never.

[elsongs]

Originally posted by brophyd My question is this: When it comes to playing covers, should they be played exactly like the recording, or should the band take it and make it it's own (playing what sounds good)? Uniqueness?

 

 

If you play in a Cover Band - a band that plays virtually all cover songs - then you are judged by the audience on how faithfully you can reproduce the songs you are covering - the more you sound like the recording, the better you sound.

 

If you play in an originals band, and include a few cover songs in the set, you're actually better off doing your own arrangement of the song (because people are coming to see your band, because you have a certain sound they like), while still being faithful to some elements of the original recording.

[Roy Brooks]

Originally posted by elsongs If you play in a Cover Band - a band that plays virtually all cover songs - then you are judged by the audience on how faithfully you can reproduce the songs you are covering - the more you sound like the recording, the better you sound. If you play in an originals band, and include a few cover songs in the set, you're actually better off doing your own arrangement of the song (because people are coming to see your band, because you have a certain sound they like), while still being faithful to some elements of the original recording.

 

 

I don't think the average bar patron thinks that hard. He either likes it or doesn't like it or doesn't care one way or another about it. In fact I believe the average bar patron does not really even pay any attention to the band unless the band does something they dig really well or if they play something unexpected.

[schecter62]

The fun thing about doing covers is to take the song and destroy it and let it rise from the ashes in a new form. A lot of covers we do are probably too obscure to get any kind of audience recognition but ones that people regnize are:

Johnny Cash, Ring of Fire, in open G on slide, my wife sings it and plays a lonesome bluesy harmonica that doesn't even attempt to sound like the mariachi horn section of the original.

Ramones, Swallow my pride, on acoustic capoed at the fourth fret, played as a slow sad countryish tune. One of the few songs i sing lead on

Rolling Stones, You can't always get what you want, open G on slide, wife sings.

School House Rock, three is a magic number, funkish acoustic thing with another cool harmonica part played by my wife.

Hank Williams, I saw the light, acoustic capoed at fourth fret, fast with bluesy harmonica thing

After you've been doing your originals for a while and they get kind of stale it's also kind of useful to approach them like a cover tune and morph them into something else. Keeps things interesting