Originals or covers?

[billhammond]

I like David Wilcox, too, Marshall.

And I also deplore covers done poorly.

But neither of those things really is much of an argument against people at our level of musicianship, when playing longer gigs in public, mixing originals with well done and well selected cover tunes to heighten that connection with our audiences.

[Marshall]

Ahhh. Ella Murtz. Now there's a talent !


I'm not sure I'm really at our level of musicianship.


And there's no excuse for sappiness at any level . (David Wilcox or anybody).


STAMP OUT SAPPINESS ! ! !

[Marshall]

Another thing about covers.

You're generally redoing a song that someone BIG has made famous. I'm not sure I have the horses to stand up to that kind of scrutiny.

(I love Ella. I've heard Diana Krall do some lifeless stuff)

[Cornflake]

Russell, I've never thought that doing originals was somehow loftier than performing others people's material. It's a different thing altogether. Performers and songwriters get their musical jollies in entirely different ways. Apples and oranges. Same thing with fingerstyle instrumentals vs. songs.

I can't conceive of an audience coming to hear me perform a set of covers. There are scads of people around who sing better and scads who play better guitar. I'm a pretty good songwriter, though. If someone wants to hear really first-rate singing and musicianship, my group can't compete with a lot of local performers. If someone wants to hear something new and different, though, the skilled performers can't compete with my group.

I too have heard a lot of people do originals who shouldn't have. Their songwriting wasn't that good. I can only think of a handful of singer-songwriters in my metropolitan area of 3 million that I have any interest in hearing. They're all over fifty. They've all put in many years of time and effort learning the craft. People who haven't put in that time and effort are often painful to hear. Those who have put in the time and effort usually hold my interest pretty well.

[billhammond]

marshall said:

Another thing about covers.

You're generally redoing a song that someone BIG has made famous. I'm not sure I have the horses to stand up to that kind of scrutiny.

(I love Ella. I've heard Diana Krall do some lifeless stuff)

Most of those big people started small, some with the very songs you may consider doing.

Does anyone know who George Hamilton IV is anymore? I think not. He did a Bob Gibson (remember him?) song that was very popular.

[mccoyblues]

I come into this with a completely different perspective than most of you. First of all, I write nothing. I can barely construct a sentence let alone a song that would make any sense. But I've played a lot of original music. Some of it was very good, some of it wasn't worth the time it took to learn it.

I can certainly understand why songwriters want to perform the material they write. Isn't that why they write. But in the context of a performance regardless if it's 4 hours long or 40 minutes long the performer has one objective. To entertain the audience. Unless you are playing to a very specific group of individuals who want or need to be challenged by unfamiliar music, people in general like to hear music they are familiar with. Especially in a pub environment.

In the blues world you can't survive without playing a set of mostly standards. But while we are expected to play all those standards there is no expectation of copying the original version in any way. Blues music gives you that freedom to express yourself musically while playing familiar hooks and singing familiar verses. Very few blues bands try to capture the sound and feel of the original songs. One, because few of us can and because the blues is expected to be an evolving art form yet still remain centered firmly on the roots of the music. I don't think you can get way with that much freedom with other genres.

We like to play 2 or 3 original tunes each set. I think we have about 10 on our song list and we add new ones as fast as we can work them out. Some of them go over great, while others don't. Some of the orignal songs I've recorded weren't worth the tape it was saved on.

I'll give you one example. I was in this session with two country songwriters. This was their first official CD release. They insisted on 100% original material. Their opinion was, this is our project, we've got these songs we've written, this is our money and our name, why would we want to record somebody else's material for our CD.

My answer was simple. How arrogant do you have to be to assume that your 12 songs are better than every other song ever written. Isn't your goal to produce a great CD that will sell. A CD with 12 strong songs. A very listenable selection of tunes that catch the ears of the listener. A CD that represents who you are on stage (where, by the way 90% of their show is cover tunes). Then why not toss out the two weakest songs on this tape and replace them with killer cover songs from your favorite writers. It'll be fun, the record buyers will recognize at least 2 song titles and it won't take anything away from your credibility as songwriters. I gave them a Gram Parsons song and a Bob Dylan song to consider.

They thought I was nuts, in fact they were insulted. Vanity won out and they released a CD with about 5 strong songs 4 decent songs and two throw away songs.

[John B]

"Vanity Won Out" would be a great name for a band.

[davidhanners]

Part of the deal with songwriters is you get their point of view or you get their take on life. When folks come to see me (the rare times they do, anyway) they generally know the songs will fall into three broad categories:

A) relationships that have fallen apart like $20 suits;
B) death;
C) violent death

That said, when we perform, we are there to entertain. I think when we perform someone else's song, we are generally doing them a favor. We are keeping their songwriting tradition alive. In some instances, we are exposing an audience that came to hear us to someone else's work.

Frankly, I had not heard of James Keelaghan(sp?) until I heard one of our Twin Cities musicians, Karl Burke, perform "Cold Missouri Waters." But through Karl (who is a fantastic performer, by the way) I discovered Keelaghan and a few years later, even found myself on stage with him at a workshop in the late great Minnesota Folk Festival.

I once read an interview with Leo Kottke in which he said the audience will forgive a wrong note, but they won't forgive an insincere note. It's the same way with songs. If you can bring something to a cover that makes it sound sincere, you'll be ok.

[timfarney]

When I was in my late teens and twenties, I was the songwriter in my crowd of musicians. I was very prolific and wrote some pretty good stuff. Some of even survived and came with me into sets I played later in life, but just a few. Most of them, once you got past the novelty of their being "original" were ok, but not top-notch.

No offence to anyone, but I find this to be true with 99% of the original material I've heard from semi-pros and hobbyists in clubs and bars and open mics over the years. If you've got the drive to say something and get it out there, good for you. Mine ran out when I got hit with adult life, and I found that I could learn and interpret 3 or 4 great Dylan, or Browne or Hiatt or Earle or Springsteen, etc., tunes in the time that I could write one "OK" one of my own. And frankly, except for the very few originals I've penned that I think are fairly close to that quality level, that's what I'd rather play and that's what I'd rather hear.

Tim

[Cornflake]

"When folks come to see me (the rare times they do, anyway) they generally know the songs will fall into three broad categories:

A) relationships that have fallen apart like $20 suits;
B) death;
C) violent death

That said, when we perform, we are there to entertain."

David, these lines are among the funniest I have read in a while. I mean that in a good way.

[Cornflake]

Tim, different strokes and all that. Springsteen has a real knack. My old friend Emily Kaitz, an obscure singer-songwriter in Fayetteville with a few small commercial successes, plays decent guitar and has a voice that is serviceable at best. If I were picking a CD to spend the evening with, I'd usually pick one of Emily's over one of Springsteen's. With one I really connect with another human. With the other I get to admire a remarkable talent from a distance. I'm glad it's not an either-or proposition because I enjoy both, but one pushes my buttons a lot more than the other.

[Marshall]

Oh, Donny. I was a second away from pasting the same quote when I read yours.

(I probably would have italicized something, though.)

Entertainment it is !

[Marshall]

If you've got the drive to say something and get it out there, good for you. Mine ran out when I got hit with adult life

I'm the opposite. I didn't have anything worthwhile to say until I hit adult life.

Kids don't know anything about life. And their music shows it.

[mccoyblues]

I remember an interesting quote from Brian Austin Whitney of Just Plain Folks regarding cover material. He says he always recommends original artists put at least one cover tune on every CD. Why, for one simple reason, name recognition. Let's just say for example you record Tupelo Honey on your CD. Then you register your CD on all of the search tools, online music sites, CDBaby and all the other hundreds of sites available on the Internet. A simple search for that song will bring up your name. There is no way any keyword search would ever find your name without that common "Key Word" and that word would be the name of the cover song you included on your CD.

So somebody pulls up Tupelo Honey on iTunes and there it is, 50 renditions to choose from. One of them yours. Your name is out there right next to Van Morrison and John Mellencamp and everybody else who ever recorded that song. The curious listener might just say, let me here what this version sounds like. That small boost of exposure is priceless to an independent artist. And the only way to make it happen is to include a familiar tune on your next CD.

[Doug]

I got the same advice from El about one cover.

[Marshall]

I included "Motherless Child/Wayfairing Stranger" partially for that reason. I figured if anyone was surfing those titles, they might find it. Though, I haven't put the disc on CD Baby or anywhere yet. Trying to decide what to do with my-space and a web site.

[iamjohnne]

I don't play out. I can't carry a tune in a bucket. If I can get anyone to listen to me play, they want to hear the funny stuff. No one is gonna sit through my rendition of Barbara Allen. But they don't care for my rendition of Jewel either.

They do kinda sit still for the two songs I have written that I play. But they are both bluesy and funny too.

Like Doug says, he is an entertainer, not so much a singer.

For me it's covers. I am just not a consistant writer, and the music is never creative. I guess I have put away my dreams of a folk music grammy.

But that's ok. 'Cause I am a folky old Granny.

[Dub]

<rant on>
A cover is a recording of a song previously recorded by another artist. Usually, the cover is the one that became the hit. The original artist is normally the first recording of the tune and the recording may have been kept down by the industry due to the race, national origin, etc. of the artist.

Performing other people's music live is not a cover. Recording music written by others is not necessarily a cover. Many great recording stars wrote no music at all but always purchased material from composers.

Did Arlo Guthrie "cover" Steve Goodman's City of New Orleans? Not at all, he paid Steve for the rights. When Mac Wiseman recorded City of New Orleans, was it a cover of Arlo or of Steve? I would argue that it was neither. Mac's version never competed with or overshadowed either Steve's or Arlo's recording and by the time Mac recorded the tune it had almost reached the status of traditional music in the public mind.

You can't "cover" traditional music because there is no definitive original recording to cover. Most performers perform other people's music even when they have a large catalog of their own material.

A cover is a recording that becomes a big hit and leaves the original recording and artist in the shadows. For example, Elvis Presley recorded many of Little Richard's tunes and sold millions of records while most stations wouldn't play any of Little Richards music even though his versions were arguably much better than Elvis'.

Pat Boone was another well known personality (I hesitate to say artist) who sold millions of records "covering" the best efforts of legitimate musicians.

When you perform live and sing songs you did not write, you are not a cover artist.
<rant off>

- Dub

[billhammond]

dubmartin said:

<rant on>
A cover is a recording of a song previously recorded by another artist. Usually, the cover is the one that became the hit. The original artist is normally the first recording of the tune and the recording may have been kept down by the industry due to the race, national origin, etc. of the artist.

Performing other people's music live is not a cover. Recording music written by others is not necessarily a cover. Many great recording stars wrote no music at all but always purchased material from composers.

Did Arlo Guthrie "cover" Steve Goodman's City of New Orleans? Not at all, he paid Steve for the rights. When Mac Wiseman recorded City of New Orleans, was it a cover of Arlo or of Steve? I would argue that it was neither. Mac's version never competed with or overshadowed either Steve's or Arlo's recording and by the time Mac recorded the tune it had almost reached the status of traditional music in the public mind.

You can't "cover" traditional music because there is no definitive original recording to cover. Most performers perform other people's music even when they have a large catalog of their own material.

A cover is a recording that becomes a big hit and leaves the original recording and artist in the shadows. For example, Elvis Presley recorded many of Little Richard's tunes and sold millions of records while most stations wouldn't play any of Little Richards music even though his versions were arguably much better than Elvis'.

Pat Boone was another well known personality (I hesitate to say artist) who sold millions of records "covering" the best efforts of legitimate musicians.

When you perform live and sing songs you did not write, you are not a cover artist.
<rant off>

- Dub

OK, Doctor Semantics, point well taken, but we need a noun, dammit, for songs we didn't write.


p.s. ENOUGH
WITH THE
WIDE-BODIED
PHOTO POSTS
ALREADY!

[Dub]

billhammond said:

OK, Doctor Semantics, point well taken, but we need a noun, dammit, for songs we didn't write.

I have such a noun that I use a lot... song. Sometimes I also refer to songs I didn't write as tunes or numbers as well.

- Dub

"Abandon hopefully all ye who enter here."