Discussion in 'Music' started by Chris Slade, Apr 16, 2019.
Can a band best an artist who lived, wrote and played the song?
Sure, there are numerous examples of covers exceeding the original, just think of Johnny Cash doing Personal Jesus or Hurt, Sinead O'Connor's Nothing Compares 2 U, Jeff Buckley and kd Lang's versions of Hallelujah, Soft Cells' Tainted Love, Madonna's Ray of Light, Zeppelin's When the Levee Breaks (or any other of their early songs which were mostly covers, very good ones).
I can go on and on, lots of great and well-known songs are covers, many times superior to the originals.
Or did I misunderstand the question?
You mis-understood the question, but I agree covers can be better than originals.
I am asking can the best band play with more heart and soul than the best singer song writer (which is what the video is)?
My thought is that maybe the best musical minds are best not collaborating with others. Compromising with others might compromise the music.
There are plenty of examples of covers that best the songwriter's version, including some you've listed. As for the best songwriting process, there are examples of both tunes written solo and tunes that were collaborations being excellent.
Okay then. I will state that solo written and performed music is superior to music written and performed by groups, full stop. This should now be considered the correct opinion on this matter.
Except for when it's wrong, of course.
Dave I enjoy talking with you here and value your opinion on many topics...
Except when you don't.
Jesus Christ Dave.
I'm in a mood. Ask CJ, he loves my moods. :)
What I am saying is this guys band, Slipknot could never top the performance that he did alone. Just an example, I know very little about Slipknot. My understanding is he did not do much writing for Slipknot, but he did write this song.
I love Slipknot. You really can’t compare what the band can do to the sound of a single singer. It’s different worlds.
You just crossed the damn line. The whole thread is about that exact comparison.
I have no idea what is going on here but I would argue that a solo artist also can't do some of the things that a band can do. I don't think a solo grunge singer is better than Nirvana, full stop.
CJ makes a good point. That band did have two huge talents in it. Having said that now I prefer to listen to Dave solo over listening to the Foo Fighters.
Well, I disagree, and bring up one of my examples from my first post, When The Levee Breaks.
The original, by Memphis Minnie, is not superior to the additional work the members of Led Zeppelin collectively added in their production and performance of said song.
Sorta like comparing solo Eric Clapton to Eric Clapton with some of his bands. SRV solo and acoustic vs he and his band. Neil young solo & or acoustic vs Neil young and one of his bands.
Kinda sorta hard to make blanket statements. It all comes down to execution, the vibe and your personal preference. Not unlike cover songs.
I'll take the band over the solo anytime.
Separate names with a comma.