Quote:
|
Originally Posted by right-track
I think if the cover is realeased close to the original, then I'd hope to hear a very different version.
If the cover is from a track some 30 years old for instance, then I'd expect to see some respect shown to the original artist and hear a version as close to the original as possible.
|
I agree with your first point, but I'd also extend that to the second one. I think a cover should always differ from the original, at least somewhat, otherwise what's the point (at least for a single, if it was just being played live then that's different)? For example, Green Day's cover of I Fought the Law: note-for-note copy of the Clash's version (which differed greatly from the original, not sure who it's by). They released it as a single, it got tons of radio play. Respect or no respect, what was the point of that? People could've just listened to the Clash version, releasing Green Day's as a single was a shameless ploy to make money.
Covering a Who song is fine with me, but I thought Limp Bizkit's version blew (not for being different, just for being low in quality).