SirJamsalot wrote:I personally like trying to reproduce the album version of a song as closely as possible because that's what they hear on the radio, and what they expect.
well, i get the expectation thing....and i'm sure that people might be easily entertained by juggling and sword swallowing but that's another compromise i'd prefer not to make if i don't have to.

It's a great way to learn new styles of playing.
well that's something i do all the time....trying to learn and copy things that tickle my fancy. but that's something i do at home for my own growth and fun.
If you rely on your own "creativity" for covers, you you're basically exercising what you already know.
i disagree. when a band member says "hey let's do this Black Sabbath tune up reggae style" or says let's play ""Black Dog" in 6/8...i think that having to come up w a part that works ( and maybe playing it a little differently each time you perform your part) is likely more challenging than figuring out the riff off the record and then recreating it over and over again. recreating a part note for note, that's craft...not art.
If you don't care about picking up new things, just tweaking covers to your own taste, that's all personal preference, but you're gonna clobber bar patron's expectations 
well, again....it depends on what you're going for. if it's lowest common denominator, yeah....a note for note approach is the way to go.
and it depends on the expectations of your patrons. i'm not the least bit entertained by a band that plays (or is trying to play) note for note representations of songs. (yes, i know i'm in the minority).
i guess i've been fortunate enough to play w some talented and creative folks who can come up w interesting takes on well known songs and still have 'em appreciated by listeners and dancers. as usual...YMMV.