Altering the melody when singing

Just curious what you all think about this. I sometimes will sing the melody line a little differently on the second or third verse of a song to try to make it my own. I usually try to at least do the first verse / chorus as the original version.

I know if the song is real popular, people may not like it or think you just don't know the song. However, sometimes I think it makes the songs more fun and possible more interesting, if done sparingly.

that's what you're supposed to do. the melody is supposed to build as you progress thru the song.

If you improve the melody, go ahead.

If you don't improve it, the risk is great that it's worse than the original. In this case don't go ahead.

I want to hear it exactly like the record - that's what I paid for. >:-(

I do this all the time on jazz standards, since these are supposed to be interpreted. I'll often lock in to a "standard" interpretation for the first verse/chorus, such as a recognizable Sinatra or Bennett version of the melody and phrasing. But then I'll often "jazz it up", especially in the last half of the last verse and the last chorus to make it "swing" as it builds.

This is normal.

However, when I'm doing certain covers and trying to maintain "authenticity", such as some sort of classic rock or whatever song that people EXPECT to sound like the original, I try to keep to the original melody as much as possible.

Then there is the third option, where I'll take a cover song and do it COMPLETELY differently. For example, I might do an old Scorpions song, but as an acoustic number, giving me the freedom to be more expressive with the phrasing and melody, since it becomes a true interpretation instead of a straight-ahead cover. Another example that comes to mind is my version of the song "Magic", by Olivia Newton-John from the "Xanadu" soundtrack. This one I play one of two ways: as an acoustic number, or as an all-out metal song with a full band. Either way, while I DO sing the melody in a recognizable way, I sing it with some rock "stank" on it, so that if you didn't know the original, you'd never guess in a million years that it's an Olivia Newton-John song.

Anyway, as long as you like what you're doing, and the audience likes what you're doing, it's all good.

Might work. I watch the audience reaction.

If you want to set yourself apart from the rest of the pack, then I'd say go ahead and alter the melody. If you want to be known an individualistic, creative and maybe innovative artist, then do it.

You have to take into account what type of audience you are playing for as well, and also your target audience. I suggest you make a compromise between what you like (or envision) and what the audience likes. But there are exceptions, such as in cover/tribute bands; you'd want to keep it as faithful to the original as possible, especially if you want to be taken seriously as a cover band.

If you're not 100% sure of the outcome then I suggest maybe doing a small showcase of the song, just to get a better idea of what you're working with.

You could feel free to post it in the forums if you want. We'll for sure give it a good listen.

Good comments. Clearly it depends. One song I am experimenting with now is trying to do an acoustic cover of is Landslide. As a guy, I have always thought of this as a "Chicks song". I have seen a couple of guys do it pretty well on YouTube.

I think this is an example for me of a song that to change the melody could be a mistake, if not done subtly. Maybe as a guy you could get away with a little bit more.

SPAMMER = REPORTED