Cover versions?

Question

I have just had the misfortune to see Duncan James (ex Blue) attempting to sing his version of 'Amazed' by Lonestar. It was so bad I had to turn it off as soon as it was on.

Why do some singers think they can do a better job than the original, very few manage in my opinion.

Answer 1

When an artist's career is slagging, due to crappy own material, they normally revert to doing cover versions, and appearing in reality shows. This normally gives them the hit, that has eluded them for a while. Out of Blue only Simon Webbe appears to be hitting it big with his music career. Duncan's album and singles sank without a trace therefore the reason for covering "Amazing" and appearing in "Dancing On Ice" tv crap.

Answer 2

I think it depends on the band and the song they are covering. I think it's a waste of time covering a track that is really well known because it is so obvious that it's only recorded to make money. It's a lot better to cover a song that isn't very well known because then the band can claim more ownership over it. However there are some really great covers out there, Hounds of Love by Kate Bush was covered by the Futureheads (and I personally think it's better than the original). Also Hallelujah was originally a Leonard Cohen track but Jeff Buckley's version is beyond anything the best because of the soul he puts into it.

Answer 3

Hmm I don't know. If you listen to the Live Lounge album that's out at the moment, there are some good covers on there (like "Hounds of Love", by Kate Bush (can't remember who copied it) and I actually think the Franz Ferdinand version of "What You Waiting For?" (originally by Gwen Stefani) is actually much better than the original. Take That does a good version of "How Deep is your love?" (I could never say it was as good as the Bee Gees, but it's good

Mind you, some covers are really cringey. I agree with the Duncan James one (although I'm not really a fan anyway). I can't think of any at the moment, as I try to avoid them as much as I can.

What about people who use the background as another song, but with different lyrics (for example, like Gwen Stefani and that Sound of Music one she did? (I can't remember what its called. Couldn't stand that either.) Questionmaster, what do you think of those kind of songs, just out of interest? Do they count as covers?

x

Answer 4

Totally agree!!! Especially British corny pop singers, they wreck the songs! Some cover versions are cleary good though and stuff but nothing is worser than corny Brits taking an alright song and destroying it and it is mainly always the Brits (that X Factor creature- A Moment Like This)

Answer 5

Sometimes the cover version IS better ,case in point Johnny Cash "Sunday Morning Coming Down" (Kris Kristofferson) ,"Rock Island Line" (Leadbelly) ,"Daddy Sang Bass" (Carl Perkins) ,"Hurt" (Nine Inch Nails) etc. (sense a theme here ? LOL)
Elvis sang most of his covers better than the originals.

Answer 6

Johnny Cash. The last four albums were proof that the original can be improved on. For the reverse effect, see Westlife.

Or Whitney Houston.

Answer 7

i think some people do a great job and if the people like those bands/singers more than the original, then the song might get more popular than it would have otherwise.

Answer 8

Probably because they are fans and want to sing their song on the album because they can't think of other songs or have a big ego

Answer 9

sometimes its nice to hear a classic sung by another singer (if they can actually pull it off) i can think of a few covers that i like such as puff daddy - missing you, keisha white - the weakness in me and a few others.

Answer 10

i agree. i really like country, but it lost points in my book when someone tried to remake Hinder's Lips of An Angel. yuck.