3 ms·

I've noticed this happens with covers of other songs too and it angers me to no extent when they deviate from the original beyond changing the octave and such.

• munchler 3y ago
  Gotta disagree with you there. The whole point of a good cover is to put your own spin on the song. If it's just a note-for-note redo of the original, why bother? The best covers end up "owning" the song, and the original is sometimes forgotten. Do you think Johnny Cashs's version of "Hurt" would've been better if he tried to sound like Nine Inch Nails?
  • anigbrowl 3y ago
    You can make a song your own without trying to rewrite the whole melody. A particularly dramatic example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5Cp55MvX54 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5Cp55MvX54
  • charcircuit 3y ago
    The point of a cover for me is to see someone else sing the same song. >If it's just a note-for-note redo of the original, why bother? People's individual voices are different. It's not like a synthesizer where every note sounds the exact same. >Do you think Johnny Cashs's version of "Hurt" would've been better if he tried to sound like Nine Inch Nails? From a quick look it seems like the main difference is that John doesn't mumble as much. I think it's fine to clearly enunciate the words of a song. I don't think that changes the song.