When you're doing covers

[JD01]

Is anyone else surprised when you listen to something in detail when you're doing a cover just how many little quirks and funny bits are in a song that you'd just never noticed before. Even in songs that you know really well some times.

A mate of mine asked if he could come over and record a couple of covers so I've just been getting some projects set up and checking I can even remember how to play a few songs... one of them is Do The Evolution by Pearl Jam... in my mind this was always just a basic, but good, punk song with 3 riffs in it. Turns out there's loads of little quirky shit in the interludes that I just hasn't really heard until I was looking for it.

[Lt. Bob]

A different take:
Earlier I responded to this but have been thinking about it while running errands and I have different thoughts.

First off ..... I often say I don't really try to learn songs lick for lick and I mostly don't....... however that's just for the last couple of decades.
But of course I did when I was young ..... that's how young players advance .... I was in my first gigging bands when I was 12 and I'm positive that everything I played was as note for note as I could manage.
First song I remember trying to get perfect was on sax .... King Curtis' 'Soul Serenade'.

We'd learn the Beatles or the Stones lick for lick.
Some of it was difficult in ways we didn't grasp like the Animals .... easy to play their songs note for note .... but they were 'loose' in a way that eluded us .... that 'feel' thing .... ... we'd play the notes but something wasn't right.

And so it went on thru college and afterwards as I played in working bands .,.... as a bass player it was awesome and we were doing Yes and ELP and that sort of thing .... in other bands doing Led Zeppelin .... Kansas .... Aerosmith ... and still others doing soul music ... Wilson Pickett on into disco stuff ...... always pretty much note for note.

For jazz bands you'd just learn the head and were free to go as you pleased come solo time so that was a good place to learn to improvise.
Playing in house bands in meat markets meant learning 3 new hits a week and always exactly like the record.
I always had big ears so it was fairly easy for me which, of course, got me gigs.

And on a personal level I studied the players I admired.
I learned every single Beatles song note for note ..... every Jimi Hendrix song ...... I spent years learning Johnny Winters' licks ..... lots of others.

As a sax player I studied Sonny Rollins ... Yusef Lateef .... 'Lucky' Thompson ..... some things were beyond me so I'd have to work it out.
"That note isn't even ON a sax so how's he playing it?!!?"
Didn't know about altissimo notes until later.
So I absolutely learned songs note-for-note for a long time.

And the biggest thing I notice in songs I feel like I knew very well is often how little is actually there.
Drums/bass .....a guitar going *chink* *chink* *chink* ...... sometimes nothing else.
All focused on the singer and the rest is just to move them along.

That jumps out at me on a LOT of songs ..... the surprising minimalities of them.

[rayc]

James gets the Beato bug!
You're probably correct but even when in a mostly "covers" power pop band we simplified fiddly stuff so that we could drive the song along.
As a listener i do hear the tricks n complications after I've become very familiar with a song...until then I let the beautiful noise overwhelm me.

[Armistice]

Not that I record covers, but yeah, I hear what you're talking about and have always heard more complex things than end up in most cover band's attempts to play the song.

The number of times I hear bands/soloists etc. play something that's just WRONG is amazing. But no-one seems to notice. Tells you all you need to know about the musical knowledge of the average punter.

And there's making an adaptation of a cover because it's simpler to play given any particular constraints you're under - everyone does that - and then there's making an adaptation of a cover because you're not musically erudite enough to work out what's actually being played - lots do this too, and I can tell the difference, even if no-one else around me seems to. It's often the sort of thing where the original chord, note, phrase, whatever isn't actually hard, or any harder to play than what the guitarist (and it's almost always the guitarist) is playing, he's just unaware it's incorrect.

[CrowsofFritz]

When doing the Beatles Medley, the one thing that seemed complex to me is how they got all those moving parts to mesh together in a recording process that was a lot harder than it is now. But as far as the individual parts go, it seemed pretty straightforward.


Regarding whether covers are wrong, it’s definitely a matter of intention. If the artist intended to play it the same way, and it’s not, then it’s wrong. But if they didn’t, it can’t be wrong. It’s their cover.

Back to the Medley, I’ve posted it quite a few different places before posting it here, and one guy was adamant and insistent I play the solos in The End as they were in the recording. I kept telling him I’m not doing that. If it were a guitar solo like in “Something,” where it was well thought out, I could maybe get the disconnect between expectations and what they hear, but the solos in The End weren’t thought out. They were faffing around having fun together when they likely internally realized that would be their very last recording together.

[Lt. Bob]

Not that I record covers, but yeah, I hear what you're talking about and have always heard more complex things than end up in most cover band's attempts to play the song.

The number of times I hear bands/soloists etc. play something that's just WRONG is amazing. But no-one seems to notice. Tells you all you need to know about the musical knowledge of the average punter.

And there's making an adaptation of a cover because it's simpler to play given any particular constraints you're under - everyone does that - and then there's making an adaptation of a cover because you're not musically erudite enough to work out what's actually being played - lots do this too, and I can tell the difference, even if no-one else around me seems to. It's often the sort of thing where the original chord, note, phrase, whatever isn't actually hard, or any harder to play than what the guitarist (and it's almost always the guitarist) is playing, he's just unaware it's incorrect.

lol .... then you'd think everytime I play a cover I play it wrong because I don't bother with that.
And bro ..... not because I can't play it exactly like they did ...... I just got thru explaining that I used to play that way. There's nothing I need to simplify ... I just don't care about it .... been there, done that. I do this for a living and I'm absolutely as good or better than any of 'em and that "gotta play it just like the record" thing is about as easy as music can be.

But you're still caught up in the absurdity that you must play a cover just like the original or it's wrong.
That's bullshit and stupid and I really have little respect for it when I run into it ..... it's one of the ways I judge other musicians.
If it's a tribute band then fine ..... that's what you should do ..... but otherwise I want to see a little musicianship and that does not mean doing an impression of a tape recorder. I lose interest pretty quickly if that's all someone can do.

Tell Sonny Rollins his cover of Favorite Things is wrong because it bears little resemblance to the original.

It drives me crazy when musicians think that but just makes me realize they're amateurs and can't get past it.

[CrowsofFritz]

Not that I record covers, but yeah, I hear what you're talking about and have always heard more complex things than end up in most cover band's attempts to play the song.

The number of times I hear bands/soloists etc. play something that's just WRONG is amazing. But no-one seems to notice. Tells you all you need to know about the musical knowledge of the average punter.

And there's making an adaptation of a cover because it's simpler to play given any particular constraints you're under - everyone does that - and then there's making an adaptation of a cover because you're not musically erudite enough to work out what's actually being played - lots do this too, and I can tell the difference, even if no-one else around me seems to. It's often the sort of thing where the original chord, note, phrase, whatever isn't actually hard, or any harder to play than what the guitarist (and it's almost always the guitarist) is playing, he's just unaware it's incorrect.

lol .... then you'd think everytime I play a cover I play it wrong because I don't bother with that.
And bro ..... not because I can't play it exactly like they did ...... I just got thru explaining that I used to play that way. There's nothing I need to simplify ... I just don't care about it .... been there, done that. I do this for a living and I'm absolutely as good or better than any of 'em and that "gotta play it just like the record" thing is about as easy as music can be.

But you're still caught up in the absurdity that you must play a cover just like the original or it's wrong.
That's bullshit and stupid and I really have little respect for it when I run into it ..... it's one of the ways I judge other musicians.
If it's a tribute band then fine ..... that's what you should do ..... but otherwise I want to see a little musicianship and that does not mean doing an impression of a tape recorder. I lose interest pretty quickly if that's all someone can do.

Tell Sonny Rollins his cover of Favorite Things is wrong because it bears little resemblance to the original.

It drives me crazy when musicians think that but just makes me realize they're amateurs and can't get past it.

I’ve noticed there’s a very strong and vehement divide on this, as I somewhat alluded to in my last comment.

As for me, I can’t comprehend it. To me, if it sounds good, I don’t care.

It reminds me of my English professor back in college. She’d have to read papers twice. The first time just looking for any grammatical or structural errors and the second time for the actual argument.

I can’t imagine doing that with music, where, if something is grammatically or structurally wrong, the whole paper is unreadable. It’d make me lose interest in listening to any kind of cover pretty quick.

That’s not to say that I don’t notice something that strays too far and poorly from the original.

There was a post on the Beatles subreddit of a teenager playing a bass cover to All My Loving. It was wrong and he was clearly intending to play it accurately, so I helped him out by making my own video where I slowed down the bass while singing along and gave it to him. He and others in that thread were appreciative of it.

But now I play the bass to that song ever so slightly differently. The last notes to it where it goes “and I’ll send all my loving...to you...” and the two notes following. It’s not the same as the original. I’ve had a few people call that out but most people are fine with it because it still sounds fine. I myself prefer my version. And that’s all that really matters because when I’m covering the song, it’s mine to do whatever I want with.

That doesn’t discount that a large, large number of people want it played note for note, though. In the end, if you’re trying to appeal to people, the people decide what’s good and what isn’t. When reading critiques to my covers, I generally give more salt to something that’s recurring rather than said by one individual.

So far, nobody has said my minor bass change is bad. I’ve taken that to mean it’s fine to play in public were I to ever cover the song.

[Armistice]

Not that I record covers, but yeah, I hear what you're talking about and have always heard more complex things than end up in most cover band's attempts to play the song.

The number of times I hear bands/soloists etc. play something that's just WRONG is amazing. But no-one seems to notice. Tells you all you need to know about the musical knowledge of the average punter.

And there's making an adaptation of a cover because it's simpler to play given any particular constraints you're under - everyone does that - and then there's making an adaptation of a cover because you're not musically erudite enough to work out what's actually being played - lots do this too, and I can tell the difference, even if no-one else around me seems to. It's often the sort of thing where the original chord, note, phrase, whatever isn't actually hard, or any harder to play than what the guitarist (and it's almost always the guitarist) is playing, he's just unaware it's incorrect.

lol .... then you'd think everytime I play a cover I play it wrong because I don't bother with that.
And bro ..... not because I can't play it exactly like they did ...... I just got thru explaining that I used to play that way. There's nothing I need to simplify ... I just don't care about it .... been there, done that. I do this for a living and I'm absolutely as good or better than any of 'em and that "gotta play it just like the record" thing is about as easy as music can be.

But you're still caught up in the absurdity that you must play a cover just like the original or it's wrong.
That's bullshit and stupid and I really have little respect for it when I run into it ..... it's one of the ways I judge other musicians.
If it's a tribute band then fine ..... that's what you should do ..... but otherwise I want to see a little musicianship and that does not mean doing an impression of a tape recorder. I lose interest pretty quickly if that's all someone can do.

Tell Sonny Rollins his cover of Favorite Things is wrong because it bears little resemblance to the original.

It drives me crazy when musicians think that but just makes me realize they're amateurs and can't get past it.

What are you so cranky about? I wasn't talking to you - you've only just wandered into this thread.

What I'm talking about is when someone just plays the completely wrong chord/note because they don't know it's the wrong chord/note - and it's no harder to play the right chord/note than it is the wrong chord/note, they just got their tab from a dubious source on the internets or they otherwise can't tell the difference. They're not doing some fantastic artistic interpretation - they're just playing the song. And you're not going to see much musicianship because they don't have that much.

I see it all the time in singer strummer acoustic types, especially at open mics and what have you.

Most decent cover acts don't do this because they're pretty good at what they do - if they weren't they wouldn't get any work, but I do hear it there occasionally as well - usually as I'm walking past a bar, because I haven't actually been to see a covers band deliberately for a very long time - I usually have zero interest in hearing versions of the same songs everyone's been playing for decades. But sometimes they're unavoidable.

Perhaps I should have said "soloists/bands" in my original statement - get the emphasis better. I'll have a word to my copywriter.

Take a chill pill, or have a wank or something. Release some of that tension. It'll kill you...

[CrowsofFritz]

lol .... then you'd think everytime I play a cover I play it wrong because I don't bother with that.
And bro ..... not because I can't play it exactly like they did ...... I just got thru explaining that I used to play that way. There's nothing I need to simplify ... I just don't care about it .... been there, done that. I do this for a living and I'm absolutely as good or better than any of 'em and that "gotta play it just like the record" thing is about as easy as music can be.

But you're still caught up in the absurdity that you must play a cover just like the original or it's wrong.
That's bullshit and stupid and I really have little respect for it when I run into it ..... it's one of the ways I judge other musicians.
If it's a tribute band then fine ..... that's what you should do ..... but otherwise I want to see a little musicianship and that does not mean doing an impression of a tape recorder. I lose interest pretty quickly if that's all someone can do.

Tell Sonny Rollins his cover of Favorite Things is wrong because it bears little resemblance to the original.

It drives me crazy when musicians think that but just makes me realize they're amateurs and can't get past it.

What are you so cranky about? I wasn't talking to you - you've only just wandered into this thread.

What I'm talking about is when someone just plays the completely wrong chord/note because they don't know it's the wrong chord/note - and it's no harder to play the right chord/note than it is the wrong chord/note, they just got their tab from a dubious source on the internets or they otherwise can't tell the difference. They're not doing some fantastic artistic interpretation - they're just playing the song. And you're not going to see much musicianship because they don't have that much.

I see it all the time in singer strummer acoustic types, especially at open mics and what have you.

Most decent cover acts don't do this because they're pretty good at what they do - if they weren't they wouldn't get any work, but I do hear it there occasionally as well - usually as I'm walking past a bar, because I haven't actually been to see a covers band deliberately for a very long time - I usually have zero interest in hearing versions of the same songs everyone's been playing for decades. But sometimes they're unavoidable.

Perhaps I should have said "soloists/bands" in my original statement - get the emphasis better. I'll have a word to my copywriter.

Take a chill pill, or have a wank or something. Release some of that tension. It'll kill you...

But how do you know about intention?

The only reason I knew about that teenager’s intention was for three reasons: his articulation was reminiscent of a beginner playing, the notes he was playing strayed VERY far from the original, and he said “he’s still learning” in the title. So I asked him what tabs he was reading from. He gave it to me. The tabs were correct, he just wasn’t playing it as the original recording plays it. Or just weren’t playing at all what the tabs dictate he should be playing.

I’m not so much concerned with whether something matches but rather how it sounds overall.

One example being Snow by RHCP. I know immediately when a beginner is learning that song. That song took me several months to figure out the trick to playing the guitar riff because I couldn’t find a straight answer online as to how it’s supposed to be picked. I can hear it immediately because it sounds just like it did when I was learning it.

And it sounds bad. But I’ve also heard many different stylings of Soul To Squeeze by the same band. The bass player in my high school band was still learning. I knew it didn’t match up because back in high school that was the band I wanted to learn everything note for note.

But listening back to the recording of it right now, the bass sounds fine. He didn’t care to play it note for note, but the playing itself and how it gels with the rest of the song is perfectly adequate.

[JD01]

I just meant when you listened to a recording in detail and carefully there's often little flourishes and embellishments in the background that are really filling out the sound but you just don't hear them until you go looking for them.

[CrowsofFritz]

I just meant when you listened to a recording in detail and carefully there's often little flourishes and embellishments in the background that are really filling out the sound but you just don't hear them until you go looking for them.

I’m trying to think of a time in which that has happened to me and I can’t, really. Best idea of that is Snow by Red Hot Chili Peppers and learning how to pick it (it’s really hard to work out if you’re just going by tabs and hearing. Kinda eye opening for a learning guitarist when you figure it out) but that was more of me being a horrible guitarist at the time.

BUT, doing covers makes me appreciate things that I noticed but didn’t appreciate before. Like the bass in I Saw Her Standing There going from eighth notes to quarter notes during the solo. Makes a difference, even for those who don’t notice that, it’s perceived.

[JD01]

I just meant when you listened to a recording in detail and carefully there's often little flourishes and embellishments in the background that are really filling out the sound but you just don't hear them until you go looking for them.

I’m trying to think of a time in which that has happened to me and I can’t, really. Best idea of that is Snow by Red Hot Chili Peppers and learning how to pick it (it’s really hard to work out if you’re just going by tabs and hearing. Kinda eye opening for a learning guitarist when you figure it out) but that was more of me being a horrible guitarist at the time.

BUT, doing covers makes me appreciate things that I noticed but didn’t appreciate before. Like the bass in I Saw Her Standing There going from eighth notes to quarter notes during the solo. Makes a difference, even for those who don’t notice that, it’s perceived.

Ah, you're an RHCP fan aren't you? Have a listen to the end of Under The Bridge - they gradually throw loads of instruments in there which you might not have noticed at first. Another one is Message In A Bottle by the Police... Its not like I listen to them a lot but its a riff I learned as a kid, but then it came on my Spotify the other day when I was wearing headphones - its two bloody guitars playing different parts!

[rayc]

I saw the Police in March 1980.
The live sound was noticeably thinner than the records.
Lots of guitar fx on record and on stage to fill things out but the extra parts were missing.
They were okay but not fab.

[Armistice]

Yeah - the thread, as always, strayed from the original intention.

Sorry, JD!

[Armistice]

I’m trying to think of a time in which that has happened to me and I can’t, really. Best idea of that is Snow by Red Hot Chili Peppers and learning how to pick it (it’s really hard to work out if you’re just going by tabs and hearing. Kinda eye opening for a learning guitarist when you figure it out) but that was more of me being a horrible guitarist at the time.

BUT, doing covers makes me appreciate things that I noticed but didn’t appreciate before. Like the bass in I Saw Her Standing There going from eighth notes to quarter notes during the solo. Makes a difference, even for those who don’t notice that, it’s perceived.

Ah, you're an RHCP fan aren't you? Have a listen to the end of Under The Bridge - they gradually throw loads of instruments in there which you might not have noticed at first. Another one is Message In A Bottle by the Police... Its not like I listen to them a lot but its a riff I learned as a kid, but then it came on my Spotify the other day when I was wearing headphones - its two bloody guitars playing different parts!

I found a good YouTube about MIAB a while back - can't remember who did it, but that second guitar in the recording and what it was doing, was news to me too. I learnt that lick as a kid too, but I always knew that the way I was playing it was incorrect, but as it wasn't a song I was ever playing live in a band, I didn't really dig in any further to work it out.

The video may even have been by Beato... I'll see if I can find it.

[Alison]

I never do covers note for note, probably mostly because I really can't, I'm not a good enough player to do it. But, besides that, it's been done before so why do it again? I do know what JD is saying, that when you really listen to something with the intent of learning the song, you hear all the little things in it you missed when you just listened to enjoy.

It does though remind me of my college days learning classical sonatas and such. In particular, I was trying to learn a Shostakovich cello sonata and getting very frustrated in trying to learn every nuance and every note. I had a fantastic cello teacher who told me to basically stop listening to recordings and stop trying to get every note and start putting myself into the music. . .been my moto ever since and even though I missed a lot notes in that piece I got raves when I performed it to all of my teachers. . . So, I don't do any cover note for note.

[JD01]

Ah, you're an RHCP fan aren't you? Have a listen to the end of Under The Bridge - they gradually throw loads of instruments in there which you might not have noticed at first. Another one is Message In A Bottle by the Police... Its not like I listen to them a lot but its a riff I learned as a kid, but then it came on my Spotify the other day when I was wearing headphones - its two bloody guitars playing different parts!

I found a good YouTube about MIAB a while back - can't remember who did it, but that second guitar in the recording and what it was doing, was news to me too. I learnt that lick as a kid too, but I always knew that the way I was playing it was incorrect, but as it wasn't a song I was ever playing live in a band, I didn't really dig in any further to work it out.

The video may even have been by Beato... I'll see if I can find it.

Beato does rave about the police doesn't he. He's even interviewed Sting. I'll have a look myself now. Its weird, I could play the C#m bit of the riff I didn't even realise it was incomplete until recently.
Here you, check this out.

[JD01]

Yeah - the thread, as always, strayed from the original intention.

Sorry, JD!

Nah? It's fine. I kind of agree with both you and Bob.

[Armistice]

I found a good YouTube about MIAB a while back - can't remember who did it, but that second guitar in the recording and what it was doing, was news to me too. I learnt that lick as a kid too, but I always knew that the way I was playing it was incorrect, but as it wasn't a song I was ever playing live in a band, I didn't really dig in any further to work it out.

The video may even have been by Beato... I'll see if I can find it.

Beato does rave about the police doesn't he. He's even interviewed Sting. I'll have a look myself now. Its weird, I could play the C#m bit of the riff I didn't even realise it was incomplete until recently.
Here you, check this out.

I actually think it might have been this guy's first video that he mentions early on that I saw - not Beato.

This video is interesting - I guess I always "knew" it was a flanger rather than a chorus, but I don't think I had a flanger at the time I was playing it, so chorus it was. He's got the harmony part a little far up in his mix too. It would have been interesting seeing him try to emulate it using something other than Guitar Rig, however.

[JD01]

Beato does rave about the police doesn't he. He's even interviewed Sting. I'll have a look myself now. Its weird, I could play the C#m bit of the riff I didn't even realise it was incomplete until recently.
Here you, check this out.

I actually think it might have been this guy's first video that he mentions early on that I saw - not Beato.

This video is interesting - I guess I always "knew" it was a flanger rather than a chorus, but I don't think I had a flanger at the time I was playing it, so chorus it was. He's got the harmony part a little far up in his mix too. It would have been interesting seeing him try to emulate it using something other than Guitar Rig, however.

I like Chris Buck, his playing is good and he's from near me. I've seen him live a couple of times.

Even now, listening to it when I know what I'm listening for, i find it hard to latch my ear onto the harmony part in the mix.