As long as there are great songs, people will cover them. I did an album a couple of years ago that covered many Genesis songs ( http://www.leonplaysmusic.com/Site/..html" rel="nofollow - http://www.leonplaysmusic.com/Site/..html ). Despite having some body like Steve Hackett commenting on how much he liked the album. Sales of the songs have slowed down to a crawl. I figure some of that it's just expected but along the way I have found that most people either like the idea of covers or hate it (unless they are done by somebody already famous). It seems to me that is a matter of perception more than anything else.

The divisions come from various angles. Some people actually think that covering a song is a way to make a "quick buck" on the part of the performer. This could not be farthest from the truth. Any of you who have made records before know how much time and money it takes to professionally record a song. On top of that, add the costs of licensing and the acknowledge that it is someone else's composition. 

Covers are often compared to the original disregarding the artist intentions altogether. It would be silly for some unknown musician to try to "cash in" any big money through the recording of covers. So why doing them to begin with? Well, because people like me (and apparently Peter Gabriel, Phil Collins, YES, etc), just happen to love those songs enough to make alternate versions of them.

Covers give musicians an opportunity to study whilst at the same time pay homage to the music that for one reason or another, carries lots of personal feelings. Music is a form of art that touches all of us in many ways. As listeners as well as musicians. In that respect we all have the same thing in common and that's why I don't understand the sometimes reluctance to accept a cover song for what it is.

Without covering existing materials there would not be much of a classical music market. Jazz musicians do reinterpretations of famous pieces and many recording artists do great covers of songs (like Joe Coker's version of  "With a little help from my friends").

For my part, I wish that people would listen to some of my covers and take them for what they are. Not replacements for the originals but alternate versions of great existing songs.

http://https://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/LeonAlvarado" rel="nofollow - http://https://www.cdbaby.com/Artist/LeonAlvarado

I like a good cover if it's done well, but I have to admit, some times I hear a cover and think, "what's the point?". 

Also, I posted this on JMA, but this is easily the greatest cover ever;

Oh, and your link doesn't work. Probably cause you've got two "http"'s. 

 

 

 

 

 

and

 

 

 

 

 

I don't know, I quite liked it! I think they still managed to retain a bunch of the subtlety, but just give an interesting spin on things. I don't seriously think it's the greatest cover ever though - I do like it a bit, but it does have some humorous value as well! 

TP does raise a good point about classical music...a lot of covering going on there. But even in the jazz world, I rather hear the orinigal 1920's version, but more often than not they probably don't exist or sound like sh*t, so I must settle for covered versions. Maybe it's just rock is too young.

 

When big artists do an album only with covers, it doesn't make me excited. I just get the feeling that they have run out of creativity, and if they choose popular songs there will be an automatic interest in the album, so they don't have to worry about sales. Toto's cover album was horrific. They chose classic rock songs. The second cd of Simple Minds Graffiti Soul (deluxe edition) was a cover album which had some interesting diverse song choices. But still, it's not that exciting to me. But it was a bonus cd, so it's great as a bonus. But throwing in one cover song on an album is allright. I think when playing in a band , it's so easy to just decide to do a cover, the whole song is already written and you can just have fun. It can be a priviledge. But I think bands should restrain themselves from doing covers. There should be a really good reason, for instance an idea of a different arrangement, or an ambition to emphasize stuff of the original and make it even better. There are songs that could be made better with a cover version. Tony Banks "Strictly Inc"  is an album which has a very mechanical and stiff production. "Piece of You" could definitely be made better with a richer sound (with real drums and brass .... that synth brass solo sounds like a joke). But there are a lot of variation in the harmonies, so maybe it could really come alive in a cover version.

 

The movie "The Wicker man" had a nice song in it. The audio from the movie though isn't of the best quality. Thats a good example of when a cover version is really called for. I heard a good cover by Faith & Disease, but Nature & Organizations version is probably the best, with Rose McDowall on vocals. Better than the original, definitely!

 

 

 

 

Doing a cover song doesn't necessarily mean that a musician doesn't have creativity. For the most part it means that they have strong enough feelings for a particular piece of music to recorded in their own way. The argument about only listening to the original is like never seeing a movie remake, a theatrical revival or anything that gets reinterpreted. despite what most people say, they do go watch remakes and sometimes listen to a cover song. If anything, they would like to put their curiosity to rest. Because after all, you never know and you may like what you hear.

I think many people don't like covers because they feel there is some sacred connection between the music and its originator. There is some truth in that statement however, music is written to be performed and many of the bands that created that music will cease to exist making covers even more relevant.

If it weren't for covers, nobody within our lifetime would have ever heard of names like Beethoven, Mozart, Litz, Chopin, Ravel, Tchaikovsky, etc. That, by itself, is a pretty good argument for the existence of covers.

I don't see it as much as comparing covers with original material because they are two different things. If you want to give an artist merit for his creativity, then you must go for his original work. If you want to hear a different take on one of your favourite songs, then a cover might just do the trick. 

Remember that music is a very subjective issue. I just find it peculiar that some people can trash something with such convictions without as much as trying to understand the artist intentions. Some people love my covers, some people love my originals, some hate them both. As for me, I love Joe Coker's "With a Little Help From My friends" a lot more than the Beatles original, and I'm not bashing the Beatles who up until one point in my life were my favourite band.

To me there are good covers and bad covers but I'm not going to dismiss the concept just because. If I would have done so, then I would have never enjoyed versions like Mr. Cocker's or YES' version of Simon & Garfunkle's America (which I also happen to love).

People should be a little more open-minded, it only leads to better things.

One more thing, the corrected link:

http://www.reverbnation.com/leonalvarado" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/leonalvarado

 

Should - Bowie's Heroes by Peter Gabriel

Shouldn't - Anything by Pink Floyd by another band.

http://www.reverbnation.com/leonalvarado" rel="nofollow - http://www.reverbnation.com/leonalvarado

Oops, try the link above.

 

The only thing I personally hate are the type of cover bands I mentioned. Your stuff seems to be a work of passion and I'm always curious towards tribute type of projects covering music that I really like. 

 

An artists should always do what he feels like, but there are bands who do covers as an easy way out, playing songs live that people in the audience will recognize

 

Though Im not a fan of Imagine, I liked his version when Peter Gabriel played it live at the Olympic Games opening ceremony in 2006. I think he did a cool version, though Im not especially fond of the song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfBNyrj8p3w" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfBNyrj8p3w

Isn't it strange, then, that Bowie, on Pin-Ups, covered See Emily Play? :P

 

Bowie's version of "Let's Spend the Night Together" makes the Stone's original seem horribly mundane:

 

 

Thank god for coke and Mick Ronson.

I only recently dug into Bowie's 1970's career. Loved Ziggy, of course, and was surprised at how much I enjoyed Hunky Dory and Aladdin Sane. I definitely liked Low and "Heroes", but not enough to be anywhere near considering them masterpieces. 

I have a fun little Lynyrd Skynyrd joke for youse.

They released their Street Survivors album in 1977. Maybe if they'd called it Sky Survivors they would've fared better. ;)

 

You might like Diamond Dogs, which I view as Bowie's most underrated album. Vocally, there are few Bowie songs that can top "Sweet Thing/Candidate/Sweet Thing (reprise)". Great album in an Orwellian sense.

Alitare wrote: I have a fun little Lynyrd Skynyrd joke for youse. They released their Street Survivors album in 1977. Maybe if they'd called it Sky Survivors they would've fared better. ;)

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

I did not know that, and I now treasure the information. 

http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow - http://leonblogaswords.blogspot.com/

 

I'm sorry, but I am opposed to covers from forum members, particularly when that cover is advertised in a thread that is opposed to covers.

http://vimeo.com/kirbyferguson/everything-is-a-remix-part-2

The point isn't that there's a limited number of combinations to be done in film, but that Hollywood relies on this to make serious and consistent money. There's an amazing diversity in film actually, you just need to go beyond Hollywood productions. 

On my first album I covered Genesis' "Hairless Heart". I speak at length about why doing a cover song is not an undignified form of doing music. My basic idea is to expand the argument that not all covers are conceived the same way and for the same purpose. Please feel free to read the blog and then we can discuss further in here. I do feel that artists that do covers get a bad rap without merit.