General Music Chat

I'm at work so can't see YT. If you posted the song/artist names, it would help!

Without more details, I'd call it a 'remake', just like White Rabbit with Great Society, then Jefferson Airplane.

please. always give a heads up on what you're posting on youtube. just an annoying aspect of this forum that it doesn't post the window where you can see what you're clicking on.

on the subject, one of my favorites is when Ozzy Osbourne put out a one off live album of 13 Black Sabbath songs with a shredding guitar performance by the guitarist from Night Ranger, Brad Gillis. This was right after Randy Rhoads' death. I love Sabbath, but the fresh take on these songs on this concert were unbelievable. And t listen to the handful of Sabbath songs that Randy Rhoads (tried to) tackle on the Tribute live album makes me appreciate these jams on Speak Of The Devil even more. Gillis gets Iommi's genius and still find a way to shred without losing the road map.

this is all I can find. Black Sabbath (the song). Friggin Sharon is a beast.

https://youtu.be/4RfhQMT8UCI

The reason for Speak Of The Devil was that Ozzy was under contract to produce another album after Randy's death. I remember reading an Ozzy interview back then he tried very hard to keep the record company from exploiting Randy's death.
Brad Gillis really made a name for himself and got awesome exposure by doing this album and touring with Ozzy. If memory serves me right he was still in Quiet Riot at this time and soon left to join Night Ranger. His popularity at the time was intimidating to Jeff Watson because he didn't have the name recognition Brad had. That was all soon to change because Night Ranger ruled the 80's.

You're still butt-hurt over someone having a different opinion, eh? What a petty little man you are.

If the original artist is recording it, it's still an original song. Technically it can be considered both a cover or a remake...you could also call it a "version" or tribute or reissue or whatever, but no matter what it's titled, it's still an original song when done by the original artist...just not the original recording.


.

I'm at work so can't see YT. If you posted the song/artist names, it would help!

Without more details, I'd call it a 'remake', just like White Rabbit with Great Society, then Jefferson Airplane.

Haha, funny - I just got around to clicking on your links to find I guessed correctly!

You're still butt-hurt over someone having a different opinion, eh? What a petty little man you are.

If the original artist is recording it, it's still an original song. Technically it can be considered both a cover or a remake...you could also call it a "version" or tribute or reissue or whatever, but no matter what it's titled, it's still an original song when done by the original artist...just not the original recording.


.

OK, Mr. know-it-all, when a song is recorded by an ensemble of musicians, you know, a BAND, and only one member of the ensemble is the songwriter of the song, are the other musicians covering the song, or are they part of the "original"? If a band replaces one of the members who was on the original recording, and they play the song live with the replacement member, is the replacement member "covering" the song? If the original recording had the instrumental tracks recorded by professional studio musicians and the members of the band only sang the vocals, when they perform the song in concert, live, are the members of the band "covering" the instruments but not the vocals? If The Rolling Stones play Satisfaction in concert, are Keith, Mick, and Charlie performing, but Ron Wood is just an asshole "cover" musician?

What if the songwriter never participated in recording the song, except maybe as an unpublished demo? Does the first band to record the song get to claim it as their original, or is every version of it a cover?

I was also wondering about something. As much as you have expressed your contempt and loathing for anyone who performs any song they didn't write them self, where you find musicians to play on your recordings? Do they know you hold them all in contempt?

Gosh, you're making this so complicated when it doesn't have to be.

Any time the writer/composer records the same song it is still an original, just a different version, no matter who joins them in the process at any time for any version.

All I have ever said is that no cover song can ever be as good as the original version because they had a foundation to start with. So you can compare covers to covers and it would be a level field; but when comparing covers to the original you can only judge the musicianship of the players, or maybe the talent of a Producer, but not the song itself. There is no comparison to something that didn't exist before the writer created it.

And I've also said that I see no point in recording a song that I don't own. That's just good business sense for anyone who can write a song someone would buy.

I have no contempt for playing covers, or for those who do. If you'd like I'll record a cover song just for you while I'm home today (that window of opportunity closes tonight because I'm moving) but I wouldn't spend a penny manufacturing it for sale. That's just dumb if you don't have to do it.

All I have ever said is that no cover song can ever be as good as the original version because they had a foundation to start with.

if you're stating that as your opinion.... i accept that and it makes perfect sense for someone to feel that way.

if however you're stating that as an irrefutable FACT, then i have to strongly disagree because you're talking about something that is subjective.

i've heard plenty of cover tunes that in my OPINION are better than the original. others will disagree but that's ok because it is subjective.

You can say a cover band produced a version you preferred more, but they did not create anything so it simply can not be compared to something which didn't exist before. Not much different than comparing guitarists who came after Hendrix. Until he created the mold there was nothing like him, so you can only compare him to what was there before.

If you were to say, The Beatles write better songs than the Rolling Stones (a subjective comparison) that would be apples to apples....but this is like saying that Fab Four Beatles Tribute Band is better than the Beatles because you prefer their singer's version of John Lennon's voice, or they have a better lead guitarist, which would be easy to do.

The cover band didn't create anything. They just copied what someone else created, maybe added a twist. That is an objective fact.