Covers band players. Nail it or close enough?

[jezzaboy]

In the ac/dc tribute I play in we do the songs the way that they were done originally. Sometimes we play the live versions as they can be slightly different from the recorded versions but unlike some other dc tributes, we never add in extra fills or tart them up. Our drummer especially is right on the money which means a lot. We have a loyal following and they seem to appreciate the way we remain true to the original songs.

It might seem a bit restrictive to some but getting the chance to play great tunes from one of my favourite bands makes it a great gig.

[Happy Jack]

2 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

I'd have ticked the box 'All of the above', if there had been one. It depends entirely on the song.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[Dan Dare]

Assuming we are trying to get it close to the original, I like to nail it, or at least ensure all the key/important phrases, etc are there. There is always a little room for leeway, of course, but not for taking liberties (this applies to the whole band, of course). If we are doing something differently - changing the mood, style, tempo, etc - then it's a bit more open ended, but the harmonic structure must still be right.

Edited February 12, 2020 by Dan Dare

[stewblack]

As others have said, it depends. 

I'm too busy in too many bands to put myself under the pressure of learning everything note for note. 

However there are some songs which have distinct recognisable bass parts; which parts I learn verbatim. 

Also some tunes are carried by a repeated, distinctive line.  That gets learned and played as per the original. 

However, in two of my bands I don't think I have ever played the same song the same way twice! It's great fun that way, much more creative and a seat of the pants experience which I love. 

[la bam]

Follow it the best you can, then make it your own with what you cant, or what doesnt work for your band.

I always look at it that if you give 100 people a paragraph to read out loud, then everyone will be read out differently, but say the same message.

Different pronunciation, phrasing, dynamics, but all come across good because they are natural. Not forced. And they all say the same thing. Try to copy someone exactly and it just wont sound right. Maybe something you cant put your finger on, but you can tell something is not quite right or doesnt sound natural.

I look at musicianship the same way. No 2 musicians will be exactly the same, no two bands will play the same piece exactly the same way.

Embrace it and enjoy it.

Edited February 12, 2020 by la bam

[Stub Mandrel]

Nice to nail it, but sometimes you can't. If it's complex, I generally learn the bones of it then add detail, but I get a lot of satisfaction from playing something spot on, especially a walking line.

It also depends on genre. If it's the Faces or a Rory Gallagher song then why try and duplicate something the originals would have played differently every time themselves? Use it as a chance to develop my improvisation.

Or circumstances, doing a gig on Saturday, mostly new stuff and styles for me. Acoustic, fretless (me) and vocals. Very few rehearsals and some songs I've only played once so far... some songs are totally improvised, some are in the spirit of the original, a few are by the book. I've learned up to the start of the second verse of Wherever I Lay My Hat and beyond that I'm 'in the style of' - going to be hairy as it's just going to be bass and vocals (am I scared - no I'm s***g myself!)

 

*Ace of Spades - I've had to learn how to play bass chords, super fast, with a plectrum. I would never have attempted this and have now discovered the main risk is cramp!

OTOH, doing a battle of the bands with the main band the week after. Eight songs, six of them we're aiming to nail*, one I simplified but I'm now adding in bits and for one I'm going to just have as much fun as I want as we'll all go OTT 🙂

 

 

Edited February 12, 2020 by Stub Mandrel

[machinehead]

I do all sorts of different things but rarely learn a song as per the recording.  That is unless there is an essential bass line that is key to the song, then I play it the same, for that part at least.

Frank.

[AdrianP]

In my main band, we don't so much play covers as covers of covers. For instance, we play a cover of Rocking in the Free World (yes, I know!) but a cover of the Suzi Quatro version. Actually, I add some riffs in from a Bon Jovi live version so it's a completely different version to the original. Same thing for a cover of House of the Rising Sun. We do a cover of the Frigid Pink version, not the Animals version. 

The only cover where I do try to follow the original is You Oughta Know but precisely following Flea's riffing in F# is kinda tough. I think i play all the right notes, not necessarily in the right order!

So I suppose it all depends on how your band sees the original material. If you're a tribute band, then by all means follow the original. But some bands like us see the original as source material only to be played in our own style. 

[stewblack]

I should add another important exception to the rule, I always stick to the original bassline if it was written by a master.

The day I think I can come up with better than Jamerson, Osborn, Kaye, Entwistle, Watt-Roy or Thomas is the day I need sectioning. 

Edited February 12, 2020 by stewblack

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, AdrianP said:

So I suppose it all depends on how your band sees the original material. If you're a tribute band, then by all means follow the original. But some bands like us see the original as source material only to be played in our own style. 

Yes, similar here. If there is something iconic in the bassline, or well known I will copy that, or if it is something I really like I will too (and in fact if I really hate it), but in general it is a variation on a theme. What person from any original band plays the same thing all the time without adding or removing. I am there to bring life to the song and enjoy myself in the process, so I do whatever feels right. 

[fleabag]

Almost exactly what dad said. 

Some tracks we cover are practically identical, some have bits changed to enhance things,  some just embellished. The only thing we havent done, AFAICR, is that we havent dumbed any down

[ribbetingfrog]

If our drummer chose the song he makes us get it perfect, every note.

Other songs I get it as close as possible making sure to get the heart of the bass line and leave some wriggle room for ease or adapting to my style.

[chris_b]

1 hour ago, ribbetingfrog said:

If our drummer chose the song he makes us get it perfect, every note.

There is a lot to be said for striving for perfection. I don't knock that as an objective, but does perfection mean copying note for note? Not sure about that.

[dave_bass5]

22 hours ago, Cuzzie said:

Nail wherever possible and stay true.

Same, but, im not really good enough to nail most of the songs, so i dumb them down to my ability.

Also as my drummer cant get anywhere near the original groove/rhythm/timing etc, playing he bass line spot on is never an option anyway.

[Phil Starr]

The gist seems to be that how close you get depends upon the situation and the song. As a bassist in a covers band the aim for me is to serve the band and serve the song in that order. It's rare for the rest of the band to play a song note for note so you will have to adapt a little anyway. The multitracking in anything recorded since the mid 60's make it impossible for five people to cover what can 30+ recorded tracks anyway. Just as a simple example you can't play the bass to Walk On The Wild Side with a single bass however clever you are. If the drummer plays a different rhythm then I'm going with the drummer. I'll even have a go at a guitar fill if there's only one guitar and a two part bit of the song.

I've a pet hate though, I can't bear it when a band can't be bothered to learn the song 'properly'. I've no problems at all with rewriting it or re-arranging it but there's a certain sort of musician (guitarists mainly) who seem to think if they have the chords for the verse and chorus they don't even need to listen to the song. I kind of think that if you are going to mess with a song people love you need a reason; keys solo when you don't have keys, too difficult to play, just bored and want to mix it up a bit, want to make the song your own are all fine reasons but drop that bit because you can't be assed (escaped the filter ) and then claim it's artistic integrity... You are in a covers band for Pete's sake.

[dave_bass5]

9 minutes ago, Phil Starr said:

I've a pet hate though, I can't bear it when a band can't be bothered to learn the song 'properly'. I've no problems at all with rewriting it or re-arranging it but there's a certain sort of musician (guitarists mainly) who seem to think if they have the chords for the verse and chorus they don't even need to listen to the song. I kind of think that if you are going to mess with a song people love you need a reason; keys solo when you don't have keys, too difficult to play, just bored and want to mix it up a bit, want to make the song your own are all fine reasons but drop that bit because you can't be assed (escaped the filter ) and then claim it's artistic integrity... You are in a covers band for Pete's sake.

Yep, i have one of those. Very good player, but up his donkey a bit when it comes to knowing the songs. Always sounds like he busk's them. Doesn't listen for stops etc (drummer plays right through most stops in our song list). Caught him out at the last one. We do Ever fallen in love, the Stiff Dylans version. He keeps mucking it up. Say's he is so used to playing the original. I replied 'but you have been playing this version for 13 months, and dont play much with anyone one else'. Total BS for not putting the time in. He also insists i play the one of the Beatles songs in a cretin (wrong way), to suit his solo. 

I do like going through YT and seeing how others adapt songs, and take inspiration from those versions, so im not precious at all  about how we play them, but when its chaotic its like 'why bother being in a band'.

 

Edited February 13, 2020 by dave_bass5

[magee]

1 hour ago, Phil Starr said:

I've a pet hate though, I can't bear it when a band can't be bothered to learn the song 'properly'. 

Absolutely this, and you see it so often. We all know the bits that are a bit different - a three bar phrase there, a two beat bar there. Audiences who know the songs love hearing these little quirks and it's just lazy to ignore them. 

[Nicko]

Always adapt to the band's style, but that often means dumbing down really complicated stuff (because the band doesn't do "fiddly") and sometimes embelishing simple lines as we're a one guitar band and sometimes need to fill it out a bit.

There really is no point in playing covers so that they're identical to the original because we're not a tribute band. 

[dudewheresmybass]

I’ll answer the same as I did when I saw this question on fb. 
if it’s a covers band- it gets arranged to suit the band/ audience, whereas if it’s a tribute act it should be spot on. 

[jimmyb625]

I consider it a win if I can just get in the right key for the song!

[Bilbo]

I do one covers gig as much as a social thing as a professional one. I like the people. The pad is very basic charts with chords and no detail. I invariably don't know half the songs and may never even have heard the original version so I busk it. To date, nobody has died or complained. 

 

I did one gig once where I knew none of the tunes and hadn't played with the drummer or singer before. As we were walking to the stage, I was listening to the first tune on Spotify. The 'new' players looked at the guitarist who said 'it will be fine'. We knocked it out of the park and had one of the best gigs I can remember. Most pop songs are based on limited song forms that an educated player can find their way around without too much difficulty. It's a bit reckless if you don't know what you are doing but, if you do, it's fine. 

 

[mikel]

It depends. I feel some songs need the parts to be as the original, as any changes remove the feel. Some songs I believe that as long as the feel is right you can play with them to suit yourself. Also, some songs we change them to suit our style and make them different. If changed enough they are almost a new song. Take  "It must be Love",  the Madness version is very different from the original by Labi Siffre and stands on its own.

[krispn]

I like the discussion of covers band or tribute act but I certainly think that a covers band can do a pretty close cover and still add some of the bands personality be that in the solo's, in the structure (instrumentation dependent etc.) or for the style the band chose to play the song.

We recently started doing a cover of a cover of a two song mash up and I do tend to put my own little twist to the ending of each verse nothing fancy just maybe following the melody. I don't think anyone would notice but few would know the cover version in the first place. The next thing is to have the drummer punctuate the bits I play to tighten up the feel of those wee changes and make it a bit more our own. I find some songs can evolve or devolve the more they get played either some wee bits get added or left off but whatever works I guess. Like others I tend to stick to the original bass line but may substitute a fill if the space is there  or as above just add a wee bit leading into a bridge or chorus. I'm not much of a bass solo fan so I spare the band that indignity!

I recently saw a band while on holiday who were covering really well know chart/classic songs and the bass player was omitting what I'd consider fundamental parts of the bass lines (these parts were in the original song and gave the song that added energy, they maybe followed the vocal line or added some musical tension in the space where the vox dropped out, when the song was moving to the chorus - you get the idea). I've certainly enjoyed playing these tracks at home/live and it makes the song less interesting to play and listen to by their omission. I was likely the only person 'listening'!

[krispn]

16 minutes ago, mikel said:

It depends. I feel some songs need the parts to be as the original, as any changes remove the feel. Some songs I believe that as long as the feel is right you can play with them to suit yourself. Also, some songs we change them to suit our style and make them different. If changed enough they are almost a new song. Take  "It must be Love",  the Madness version is very different from the original by Labi Siffre and stands on its own.

I think this is what I was trying to say

Edited February 14, 2020 by krispn

[Bilbo]

14 minutes ago, krispn said:

 

I recently saw a band while on holiday who were covering really well know chart/classic songs and the bass player was omitting what I'd consider fundamental parts of the bass lines

That was probably me.