do cover songs really annoy you?

until now i didn't even realise s.o.d. had gone any further than speak english til recently.hence my comment about s.o.d. of the eighties.i was let down by people i looked up to when "speak.." was released.if on the one hand dan lilker et al would use a political base for cool points and then refuse to explain the right wing nature of "speak english..." was perplexing to say the least.you seem to base most of your argument on what has been said in retrospect after they'd realised how large the depth of feeling against them had become.by which time i'd already been letdown and lost interest in them.
you made the bill hicks comparison.i simply pointed out how it was invalid .you put that reason a lot better.
your example about two musicians seems to suggest that say frank sinatra is a lesser musician than say james hetfield?how could you say yoyo ma is a lesser musician than paul mccartney?maybe a musician who spends their time writing spends less time focusing on their voice/instrument?
the point of music(pop particularly)is to create an emotional response.these covers you so despise acheive this for a vast number of people.doesn't this validate their existence?
metal fans always use pop as a whipping boy its an easy target for them.mainly because they don't understand it.
 
Originally posted by AngelLover
I think I really depends on who is doing the covering. Some are really really really bad, but others can be really great😀
Click to expand...

I agree, and I haven't figured out a "formula" for a good or bad cover song; it just has to *work*. For instance, IMHO Lenny Kravitz's "American Woman" worked. On the other hand, I thought the Sundays cover of "Wild Horses" ("The Prom" or no "The Prom") was utterly saccharine.

Some covers are classics in their own right, like the Beatles' "Roll Over Beethoven" (orig. by Chuck Berry) and the Byrds' "Mr. Tambourine Man" (orig. by Bob Dylan).

My personal favorite is the Cowboy Junkies' acoustic version of the Velvet Underground's "Sweet Jane".
 
Can I just say that I hate it when people redo the Beatles' songs. THe only group who does them right are themselves! So let them sing their own fricken' songs! Cuz no one else does it right! Sorry, I got a little carried away.

Other than that, it usually depends. Some cover songs are awful, and some are ok, I guess. 😉
 
"happiness is a warm gun" by the breeders runs the original a pretty close second.but generally people do make a hash of beatles songs.
 
Originally posted by queenofbuffdom86
Can I just say that I hate it when people redo the Beatles' songs. THe only group who does them right are themselves! So let them sing their own fricken' songs! Cuz no one else does it right! Sorry, I got a little carried away.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. I was at a wedding reception once where the band (or the bride or groom) were really into Beatles songs, and I had a hard time keeping my food down.

(I think I once heard some metal band do a version of "Helter Skelter" that was... adequate, but it obviously didn't make much of an impression.)
 
it does anoy me when they rehash stuff several times over but some things are good when there done again but differently, like

Blue~ Fly by and Fly by 11

~* Jamie *~
 
some are good but most are bad. but as for the moulin rouge comment, i rather prefer it. but it mostly depends on your taste of music. what i may find good, you may find horrible and vice versa.
 
Sometimes (but not always) it seems to depend on which version of the song you've heard first. (Like reading the book before seeing the movie or vice versa.)
 
Originally posted by Charles Gunn
until now i didn't even realise s.o.d. had gone any further than speak english til recently.hence my comment about s.o.d. of the eighties.i was let down by people i looked up to when "speak.." was released.if on the one hand dan lilker et al would use a political base for cool points and then refuse to explain the right wing nature of "speak english..." was perplexing to say the least.you seem to base most of your argument on what has been said in retrospect after they'd realised how large the depth of feeling against them had become.by which time i'd already been letdown and lost interest in them.
you made the bill hicks comparison.i simply pointed out how it was invalid .you put that reason a lot better.
your example about two musicians seems to suggest that say frank sinatra is a lesser musician than say james hetfield?how could you say yoyo ma is a lesser musician than paul mccartney?maybe a musician who spends their time writing spends less time focusing on their voice/instrument?
the point of music(pop particularly)is to create an emotional response.these covers you so despise acheive this for a vast number of people.doesn't this validate their existence?
metal fans always use pop as a whipping boy its an easy target for them.mainly because they don't understand it.
Click to expand...
Originally posted by somekrazydude
but it mostly depends on your taste of music. what i may find good, you may find horrible and vice versa.
Click to expand...
Well I believe anyone who thinks Frank Sinatra is any lesser a musician than James Hetfield has a few bearings of the industry wrong. You seem to think I suggest or mean a lot of things, try taking things more along what's on the page, lol. I simply imply musicians having a "neutral stance" (personal preference being a focal point) and, well Frank and James are not exactly neutral in their abilities as musicians. Your point is taken though, "maybe a musician who spends their time writing spends less time focusing on their voice/instrument?" and I tend to agree, maybe, yes maybe they do? But that's another perspective to the debate, I just argue for musicians who have the ability to accomplish both merits. Someone who writes is a writer; but someone who writes songs is a lyricist, a poet and a huge element towards music in my opinion. In this day and age musicians come in all forms (and to why my opinion is based predominantly on the pop industry), be it the sound engineer's, vocalists or songwriters and creating the music is just as, if not even more important to me than actually performing the music. I believe the fundamental property of music, as an art form, is to create anyway.

Validate it's existence, why of course. But I think your making an allowance for just the fans of pop music and not my own opinion. I don't like the industry, but that doesn't therefore mean that has anything to do with how valid (or invalid) I think it is. I never broached such remarks and ever questioned the fact that pop music doesn't create an emotional response. As for metal fans using it as a "whipping boy" lol... well an easy target, maybe, but all music has an emotional response and it will suit a plethora of mixed views and what does and doesn't aspire musically towards people. It's not because metal fans don't understand it, I for one have knowledge of many forms of music; whether it be korny prog rockers, the worn-out grindcore scene, the now tarnished area of hip-hop (roots, bl**dy, roots), the elite jazz cats scattered around nightclubs, '67, punk, anarchy now just a deluded ideal, the psychedelic sounds of the 60's, European Metal be it the symphonic Scandinavians, the blast beat Swedish/Norwegians or the upcoming melodic/hardcore contrasting progressions from Hungarians... i could go on. I just think, more than anything though I just know what I like and somekrazydude re-interpretes that notion somewhat.
 
Jonut im going to have to disagree with you on marilyn manson , alien ant farm and Kelly Ozbourne...

I happen to like these songs lol....well

I have to agree with Faith...It depends on which song and by who.
But the atomic kitten, travis and less than jake songs i can agree with you...i hated those ones.
 
Originally posted by Lost_Slayer
Jonut im going to have to disagree with you on marilyn manson , alien ant farm and Kelly Ozbourne...

I happen to like these songs lol....well

I have to agree with Faith...It depends on which song and by who.
But the atomic kitten, travis and less than jake songs i can agree with you...i hated those ones.
Click to expand...

The first list i posted I didnt like but the second including Marilyn, Alien Ant Farm and Kelly Osbourne were in the ones I liked. You just misread them I think
 
oh...whoops...stupid me...sorry

i didnt have my glasses on (not an excuse i really do have to wear glasses for reading)

still very sorry

(after all im known for not being bright...)
 
Originally posted by Oz


Well I believe anyone who thinks Frank Sinatra is any lesser a musician than James Hetfield has a few bearings of the industry wrong. You seem to think I suggest or mean a lot of things, try taking things more along what's on the page, lol. I simply imply musicians having a "neutral stance" (personal preference being a focal point) and, well Frank and James are not exactly neutral in their abilities as musicians. Your point is taken though, "maybe a musician who spends their time writing spends less time focusing on their voice/instrument?" and I tend to agree, maybe, yes maybe they do? But that's another perspective to the debate, I just argue for musicians who have the ability to accomplish both merits. Someone who writes is a writer; but someone who writes songs is a lyricist, a poet and a huge element towards music in my opinion. In this day and age musicians come in all forms (and to why my opinion is based predominantly on the pop industry), be it the sound engineer's, vocalists or songwriters and creating the music is just as, if not even more important to me than actually performing the music. I believe the fundamental property of music, as an art form, is to create anyway.

Validate it's existence, why of course. But I think your making an allowance for just the fans of pop music and not my own opinion. I don't like the industry, but that doesn't therefore mean that has anything to do with how valid (or invalid) I think it is. I never broached such remarks and ever questioned the fact that pop music doesn't create an emotional response. As for metal fans using it as a "whipping boy" lol... well an easy target, maybe, but all music has an emotional response and it will suit a plethora of mixed views and what does and doesn't aspire musically towards people. It's not because metal fans don't understand it, I for one have knowledge of many forms of music; whether it be korny prog rockers, the worn-out grindcore scene, the now tarnished area of hip-hop (roots, bl**dy, roots), the elite jazz cats scattered around nightclubs, '67, punk, anarchy now just a deluded ideal, the psychedelic sounds of the 60's, European Metal be it the symphonic Scandinavians, the blast beat Swedish/Norwegians or the upcoming melodic/hardcore contrasting progressions from Hungarians... i could go on. I just think, more than anything though I just know what I like and somekrazydude re-interpretes that notion somewhat.
Click to expand...

i just think you took a cheap shot at a music style you give the impression you don't understand(or would want to)your musical tastes seem to have a big mainstream hole in it.how can you critique a music style when you're so far removed from it?
 
whoo i never thought that the thread was gonna be so serious!!!!lol!!! well anyway, about cover songs i ahve to agree and make an exception about the whole moulin rouge soundtrack, that totally rocks!!! (i even own that !) the "like a virgin" cover had me in stiches and i love the love medley!!
 
Originally posted by carlyh
whoo i never thought that the thread was gonna be so serious!!!!lol!!!
Click to expand...

I guess a lot of people have very strong opinions about the music they listen to. I know I do, and I've been told I'm pretty eclectic in my tastes. (Maybe it's what we *don't* like, however few and far between, that we have the strong feelings about...)
 
Originally posted by Charles Gunn
i just think you took a cheap shot at a music style you give the impression you don't understand(or would want to)your musical tastes seem to have a big mainstream hole in it.how can you critique a music style when you're so far removed from it?
Click to expand...
Removed by choice. The little understanding to which you think i give an impression (imply, suggest, now impressions, lol) is not only unjustified (would want to is irrelevant due to the knowledge being fed from experience), but also wrong as the mainstream (a.k.a. pop industry) i speak of wasn't based on simple remote knowledge (i couldn't imply every genre, it was a random selection at the time), but the fact that my critque is from experience and composite thoughts such as hate, opposition, despise, dislike... all secondary emotions that combat human logic and *impressionable* fact into tangents. Is my criticism not justified if I dislike the subject matter, of course it is. Another preference-led subject i think you'll find...

Originally posted by Tyra
Maybe it's what we *don't* like, however few and far between, that we have the strong feelings about...
Click to expand...
... as to Tyra's point. 🙂
 
Originally posted by Oz

Removed by choice. The little understanding to which you think i give an impression (imply, suggest, now impressions, lol) is not only unjustified (would want to is irrelevant due to the knowledge being fed from experience), but also wrong as the mainstream (a.k.a. pop industry) i speak of wasn't based on simple remote knowledge (i couldn't imply every genre, it was a random selection at the time), but the fact that my critque is from experience and composite thoughts such as hate, opposition, despise, dislike... all secondary emotions that combat human logic and *impressionable* fact into tangents. Is my criticism not justified if I dislike the subject matter, of course it is. Another preference-led subject i think you'll find...


... as to Tyra's point. 🙂
Click to expand...

i was just trying to say most of your criticisms came from a lack of understanding of pop.i would never presume to seriously critique(for example) norwegian satanic metal even though the little i've heard has not been to my taste i just don't know enough about it.
 
Originally posted by Charles Gunn
i was just trying to say most of your criticisms came from a lack of understanding of pop.i would never presume to seriously critique(for example) norwegian satanic metal even though the little i've heard has not been to my taste i just don't know enough about it.
Click to expand...
Ok, ok, were losing the plot a little, but since when did I have a lack of understanding towards pop? I read and study the industry just like any other (in fact due to mass media coverage it's hard not too). My criticisms are based on the knowledge and disposition towards it and I certainly don't critique anything (especially within music) without bearing.
 
if you understood pop you wouldn't have brought the who wrote the songs who can play instruments best into the argument.
 
Originally posted by Charles Gunn
if you understood pop you wouldn't have brought the who wrote the songs who can play instruments best into the argument.
Click to expand...
Quotation would help Charles Gunn (when did i bring this up?) and, well despite not actually understanding what you mean, you don't have to understand the whole industry to have a certain amount of knowledge/experience about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom