<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Are covers always a good thing?

February 8 2005 at 8:33 PM
  (Login soundselectah)

I just heard this cd by Joe Cocker "Heart and soul" and it's all cover songs! What do you think? I simply love cocker's version because he puts his own twist to something that has been done perfectly once before and has achieved to put out the same song but in a different flavor. I don't think this can be achieved to often, but Joe Cocker does a great job. Maybe because he's notorious for covers? www.cocker.com - what do you guys think?

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Soozin
(no login)

Re: Are covers always a good thing?

March 10 2005, 4:36 PM 

I've heard Joe Cocker's version of "The Letter" and I like it better than the original. I think it's a wierd choice of song to cover - I don't really like the original, but Cocker made something so dumb and flimsy sound like it was breaking news.

And slightly unrelated, I like it alot when bands do covers at live shows, but not as much when they record them. Seems like if they do it live it's because the song/songwriter is inspired by or admires something about the cover. If they record it, it seems like a somewhat desperate attempt at selling records, i.e. Pearl Jam/"Last Kiss."

But I don't hate all recorded covers - some are very good.

 
 
Current Topic - Are covers always a good thing?  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index