Covers

I prefer putting in my own fills. You don't want to exactly copying the song. You're just doing what someone else has already done. By adding your own, you make it (at least partly) your own song.
 
T C S said:
Do covers have to be perfect fill wise? Can you put in your own fills?
Click to expand...
No to first part, yes to the second part. I always try to find drummers who put their own stuff in cover-tunes. But sometimes it can be good to replicate the groove and some fills.
I do this myself.
 
It depends:

If you're a tribute to a certain band - yes

If you're a band who happen to cover a certain band's song - no
 
Depends on the song. If it's something like Zeppelin, you'll get a thousand purists down your neck screaming how you didn't put in that 'triplet in bar forty-four'. For the majority of stuff where the fanbase isn't quite so rabid, do what you like.
 
mediocrefunkybeat said:
Depends on the song. If it's something like Zeppelin, you'll get a thousand purists down your neck screaming how you didn't put in that 'triplet in bar forty-four'.
Click to expand...
F**k 'em

Bonham didn't play everything exactly and he didn't care, why should anyone else?
 
Hellwyck said:
F**k 'em

Bonham didn't play everything exactly and he didn't care, why should anyone else?
Click to expand...

I don't, but thousands would disagree. One look at YouTube tells me this. There are just certain songs where you have to tread carefully - even if you can play it, and that's not the fault of the drummer, that's the fault of the ignorami in the audience.
 
Hellwyck said:
It depends:

If you're a tribute to a certain band - yes

If you're a band who happen to cover a certain band's song - no
Click to expand...

I agree with this, it depends on how you are approaching the cover.

If you want to pay homage to a certain song, recreating it in its entirety, then yeah sure, keep it perfect, recreate it how it was.

If you're just covering it because you like the song and want to do your own rendition of it, mess with it as much as you'd like.

I've heard some pretty night and day covers before, as well as covers that might as well be the original band playing the song.
 
mediocrefunkybeat said:
I don't, but thousands would disagree. One look at YouTube tells me this.
Click to expand...
Youtube viewers are generally illiterate idiots after a fight with people they've never met.

There are just certain songs where you have to tread carefully
Click to expand...
I know this.

However, if you're a diehard fan of Deep Purple (say,) you can get away with your own version of Black Knight, someone on XFactor who wouldn't normally own a DP record shouldn't touch 'Smoke On The Water' for fear of blasphemy.
 
Hellwyck said:
Youtube viewers are generally illiterate idiots after a fight with people they've never met.


I know this.

However, if you're a diehard fan of Deep Purple (say,) you can get away with your own version of Black Knight, someone on XFactor who wouldn't normally own a DP record shouldn't touch 'Smoke On The Water' for fear of blasphemy.
Click to expand...

Then how do you gauge it?

I'm not saying I agree with the sentiment that the songs should never be changed - I absolutely think that you should be able to do what you like with a song. Absolutely anything, but this for me is actually more of a dig at the fans of certain bands - typically 70's era rock bands that seem to have this morbid fascination with perfect replication.

I can understand somebody wanting to sound like David Gilmour - there's a real beauty behind his playing, and I can understand somebody wanting to sound like John Bonham, but rabid fans really get to me and I have to deal with them all the time. I wish people would just move on and start listening to something a bit different.
 
mediocrefunkybeat said:
Then how do you gauge it?

I'm not saying I agree with the sentiment that the songs should never be changed - I absolutely think that you should be able to do what you like with a song. Absolutely anything, but this for me is actually more of a dig at the fans of certain bands - typically 70's era rock bands that seem to have this morbid fascination with perfect replication.

I can understand somebody wanting to sound like David Gilmour - there's a real beauty behind his playing, and I can understand somebody wanting to sound like John Bonham, but rabid fans really get to me and I have to deal with them all the time. I wish people would just move on and start listening to something a bit different.
Click to expand...

I'm under the opinion that no song is sacrosanct and beyond meddling with.

There will always be fans that hate a cover, you'll never please everyone.

If you're trying to sell a record using a cover to gain attention (as many artists do) then perhaps you might want to tread a bit more carefully.

However, if you honestly don't care whether or not it finds an audience, it is just something you're doing out of the love for it, why not be creative.

If you want to make a black metal cover of The Beatles "Help", don't let the Beatles fans that never listen to Black metal tell you that you can't.
 
Frost, I agree. Music should never be deemed 'sacred' (in those terms) and those expressing those ideas need to move on.
 
mediocrefunkybeat said:
I don't, but thousands would disagree. One look at YouTube tells me this. There are just certain songs where you have to tread carefully - even if you can play it, and that's not the fault of the drummer, that's the fault of the ignorami in the audience.
Click to expand...
I found that Rush fans were the most aggressive.
 
mediocrefunkybeat said:
Depends on the song. If it's something like Zeppelin, you'll get a thousand purists down your neck screaming how you didn't put in that 'triplet in bar forty-four'. For the majority of stuff where the fanbase isn't quite so rabid, do what you like.
Click to expand...

I think you'll get purists down your neck for any cover (if it gets enough exposure). Although when it comes to Zepplin and Rush you'll probably get more.

Take my cover of Tool's Vicarious, I missed a cymbal hit and some ghosts notes or something, and there was some goof-ball that felt the need to point it out.

Just do whatever you want in terms of covering it for youtube. There isn't a right or wrong way.

One piece of advice though, if you opt to not play it exactly as the original drummer did, you may want to consider saying that in the info box. That way people know that in bar 44 when you didn't do that Triplet, it was intentional.

Good luck!

-Jonathan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top