this post was submitted on 14 May 2024
111 points (97.4% liked)
Asklemmy
43984 readers
787 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Disturbed's cover of Sound of Silence is not only awful, it is an antithesis of the meaning of the song. Anyone who likes that version better than S&G's arguably doesn't understand the point of the song, and the fact that everyone holds it up as the gold standard of "covers better than the original" is even worse.
A close second is Postmodern Jukebox and their horrendous tendencies to take tempos to an opposite extreme instead of finding more meaningful ways of changing the genre of a song. I like some of their stuff, but the number of people who love their cover of Welcome to the Jungle is mind-boggling to me.
There are plenty of songs that I prefer the cover of to the original (Whitney Houston's 'I Will Always Love You'), or ones that just give the original a modern coat of paint without changing much else (Smash Mouth's 'I'm a Believer'), but these songs in particular are just awful imo.
I don't mind a cover changing the meaning of a song, but stuff where the cover is just the song again is...lazy as fuck?
Like Fast Car by (country music guy) is fantastic, but it's the same as the original, which is also fantastic. Feels cheap or something, I don't know. Like the whole Weezer cover album was boring as fuck. The songs are technically great, but why listen to that over the originals? Rivers said his goal was to try and reproduce the original sound, which seems like an interesting exercise for the band, but not for the listener. So that wraps back around to respecting the band.
Anyways, I have a lot of strong feelings about covers. Make it your own, even if you don't change it that much.
I think Johnny Cash's cover of 'Hurt' is probably the gold standard of a cover exceeding the origional