Cover / Other versions that work better than the original !

[Richard Tarleton]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLUYf6cekMA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCYApJtsyd0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZu8srG9VKY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyhkBg8wOBo

Some contrasting versions of "Route 66". Amazing how far this song travelled from the composer's conception, from smoky soft shoe shuffle to hard driven R&B. My personal favourite is Them's, featuring a youthful Van Morrison.

[Norfolk Born]

Peter Sellers: A Hard Day's Night (à la Laurence Olivier) and Wouldn't It Be Luverley (Indian sub-continent-style).

[burning dog]

The idea of what a cover version is seems to have changed. it used to mean a soft version of a R&B, Blues or Folk Hit song by a "popular artiste"

Songs popularised by Frank Sintara or Nat King Cole sung by others were just considered "other versions". I suppose it's because most of them were written for musicals or indepedent of any artist and then hawked around.

Since then Cover has come to mean any version of any song not by the original performer. People who sing other peoples songs or even have songs written for them appear to be looked down upon in some quarters. I must say I find the theory that songs "belong" to one person a bit strange.

There is the fact that a lot of Pop depends on the arrangement and not on the melody and chords. This means a lot of modern Pop Covers ARE lacking IMO

Here is a cover of a "Beatles" song which is in fact a cover version anyway, and a cover of a Rolling Stones number, in both cases maybe not better but significantly altered.

[barber olly]

What is the Original and what is the cover. In about 1963 Carole King and Gerry Goffin wrote 'Will you love me tomorrow' an almost perfectly crafted pop song. It was a hit for The Shirelles, and very good it was too. This then was the original. So when it appeared on Carole's own multi-million-selling Tapestry album it was the interesting situation of the writer covering her own song. There have also been several very good covers not least by Dusty Springfield and Roberta Flack. However the song was killed by Bryan Ferry. A good case of a song written for performance by a woman (or women) that men should leave alone!

[barber olly]

Four favourite versions of the great early 19th Century song "Shenandoah" -

- Van Morrison and the Chieftains -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayLMkTIx8-E

- Paul Robeson - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gtJkeXAMt0

- Bill Frisell - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=limMf...eature=related

- The X-Seamen's Institute - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgsDoxw85-4

I sing in a choir that does a creditable job of this song on our latest CD!

[burning dog]

What is the Original and what is the cover. !

Exactly. To me "Cover" means what I meant in my first sentence, a term of mild distaste.

"a soft version of a R&B, Blues or Folk Hit song by a "popular artiste"
common in the fifties and early sixties.


Any other context and it's meaningless IMO. There are just "other versions"

[teamsaint]

the start point for this type of conversation is clearly the orthodoxy that took hold of popular british and american music in the 60's that "real " artists mostly wrote their own material.

In fact, this exercise often leads to interesting musical comparisons. However, what strikes me about this is that, for all that great songs may not always be written by what you might call "great performers", that its relatively unusual to find a later version by someone else that genuinely and convincingly outdoes an original performance by the writer.

It ought to be possible to find lots of improvements on Elvis Costello songs, for instance...but I don't know of that many.

it also highlights how poor some acts are at choosing from the wealth of material available.

Personally, I think there is a lot of money to be made by taking Schubert (etc) lieder, and giving them a really modern feel, modern arrangements, and non classically trained singers.
Might not be too popular round here, though!!

[Lateralthinking1]

.....Yes, but I much prefer Elvis Costello's take on "Shipbuilding" although this will be considered an appalling confession by some.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuPrrdRzlxc&feature=related

[MrGongGong]

NO NO NO

I was about to say what a genius Robert Wyatt was compared to Costello
when is the orthodoxy of "how great the Beatles were" and "what a great singer Dylan is" going to fade ? I live in hope

(and why are the Beatles Dying in reverse order of talent ? )

and I haven't started on Laibach yet !!! Volk is a work of genius

[Lateralthinking1]

See. My prediction was right.

The Beatles are not dying in reverse order of talent. From memory, Harrison died after Lennon.

I have never described Bob Dylan as a "great singer". It would be like describing Shakespeare as someone who wrote a few good books or God as one of the better inventors.

[MrGongGong]

The thing (or rather problem !) about Dylan is that he is a good writer but his singing is terrible , its just that he has built up this huge mythology around himself
compared to Tom Waits or the great Beefheart there really is no contest

You are right about Lennon and Harrison
but we are going to be left with sodding McCartney aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh (you didn't spend your youth on Merseyside !!!!)

[teamsaint]

.....Yes, but I much prefer Elvis Costello's take on "Shipbuilding" although this will be considered an appalling confession by some.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuPrr...eature=related

don't know why anyone would think that.
Elvis is a great writer, who has written and sung many great songs. he stands with this country's very finest songwriters , in my opinion.

And he sings shipbuilding very well......... As well as Wyatt.

[teamsaint]

The thing (or rather problem !) about Dylan is that he is a good writer but his singing is terrible , its just that he has built up this huge mythology around himself
compared to Tom Waits or the great Beefheart there really is no contest

You are right about Lennon and Harrison
but we are going to be left with sodding McCartney aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh (you didn't spend your youth on Merseyside !!!!)

Dylans singing is a problem area. When he gets it right, (Maggies Farm, blind willie Mactell) he is great. But there is no doubt that other have done amazing stuff with his tunes, and brought them to a much wider listenership.

[MrGongGong]

indeed
so why (sorry to reprise an old discussion ) is he regarded as a "musician who writes words" rather than a "poet who sometimes sings " ????
musically (and I mean music as a sonic art) there's not much development or interest , unlike others ...........

[Lateralthinking1]

Well, I'm off topic but here is a clip that proves your points about Dylan's voice. And yet, and yet, apart from the dodgy ending when a corny cast gathers - that bit is embarrassing and it doesn't do any of them any favours - this is one of the most compelling 20 minutes of popular music I have witnessed, admittedly among many. I was moved to tears - and in the right ways - when it suddenly came on television in '94, particularly during the second and third track.

Vocally, he struggles badly. Many would just switch off. But it is precisely the struggle in it, the cantankerous nature of it, the stark contrast between his delivery and the prettiness around him. Poetic. Political. Spiritual. He sells in bucket loads by being virtually unmarketable in any recognizable sense. I love that. Of course, he can sing sweetly - John Wesley Harding, New Morning, Blood on the Tracks, parts of Slow Train Coming, Oh Mercy - he has always varied it - but he mainly chooses the strangled. My life would be less rich without Bob - http://www.dylanvideo.com/apps/video...-japan-22-5-94