Songs That Bands Always Play Wrong

midlifecrisis

to be fair, most "famous" bands dont play exactly to the record on live performances, often doing a different interpretation, anyone gonna tell them they're playing it wrong?

jonnygreentrees

my band write our own songs and I often play them wrong

EricTheWeary

I fancied a go at Can't Stand Losing You by The Police but I'd forgotten about that tricky harmonic bit. However, watching a few versions on YouTube including one by The Police seems to confirm that nobody actually bothers with that.

failed_astronaut

EricTheWeary said:

I fancied a go at Can't Stand Losing You by The Police but I'd forgotten about that tricky harmonic bit. However, watching a few versions on YouTube including one by The Police seems to confirm that nobody actually bothers with that.

I found it really hard to get this bit to ring out in a live context, and needed an extra clean boost for it even to be heard. I've been playing a bodged thing using delay and phase as an alternative for ages and no-one has pulled me up on it.

Here's a link to our version - 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-I--CQF3aw_cnpDUTNPNTRRWkU

robinbowes

ICBM said:

All of them, hopefully.

If there's one thing I hate more than bands trying to play note-perfect covers, it's musos criticising them for not doing.

Play the song, not the record.

I think we're talking about playing the song wrong, rather than not being note-perfect as per the record. I certainly am.

R.

not_the_dj

@failed_astronaut do you do de do do do, de da, da, da?

The instrumental bit in that has done my head in, so I just busk that with chords following the bass.  

EricTheWeary

failed_astronaut said:

EricTheWeary said:

I fancied a go at Can't Stand Losing You by The Police but I'd forgotten about that tricky harmonic bit. However, watching a few versions on YouTube including one by The Police seems to confirm that nobody actually bothers with that.

I found it really hard to get this bit to ring out in a live context, and needed an extra clean boost for it even to be heard. I've been playing a bodged thing using delay and phase as an alternative for ages and no-one has pulled me up on it.

Here's a link to our version - 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-I--CQF3aw_cnpDUTNPNTRRWkU

I get the impression Andy Summers used that part of the song to play something 'fancy' rather than what was on the record, your slightly dubby take works well 

failed_astronaut

not_the_dj said:

@failed_astronaut do you do de do do do, de da, da, da?

The instrumental bit in that has done my head in, so I just busk that with chords following the bass.  

We do indeed Do do do but we base our version on the reunion tour so there's a more distinct guitar solo going on there. I think it's over B G and A and I play it with triads on the G B and E strings starting with the F# on the G string (D shape).

failed_astronaut

EricTheWeary said:

failed_astronaut said:

EricTheWeary said:

I fancied a go at Can't Stand Losing You by The Police but I'd forgotten about that tricky harmonic bit. However, watching a few versions on YouTube including one by The Police seems to confirm that nobody actually bothers with that.

I found it really hard to get this bit to ring out in a live context, and needed an extra clean boost for it even to be heard. I've been playing a bodged thing using delay and phase as an alternative for ages and no-one has pulled me up on it.

Here's a link to our version - 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-I--CQF3aw_cnpDUTNPNTRRWkU

I get the impression Andy Summers used that part of the song to play something 'fancy' rather than what was on the record, your slightly dubby take works well 

I would agree with that assessment. It's a beautiful sound if you can get it right but switching between pick and fingers can be an arse. That version was also at ludicrous speed as we only had a 30 minute set and had decided to try and cram 6 songs into it. Doesn't sound like much of a challenge but our versions of So Lonely, Can't Stand and Roxanne are all pretty long!

ESBlonde

Doesn't sound like much of a challenge but our versions of So Lonely, Can't Stand and Roxanne are all pretty long!

I can't believe people still get that wrong - It's Sue Lawley for heavens sake!

failed_astronaut

Sue Lawley / Alistair Crowley...

ICBM

robinbowes said:

I think we're talking about playing the song wrong, rather than not being note-perfect as per the record. I certainly am.

I'm talking about playing the song differently from the original - which is fine, and to be encouraged, as long as you play your interpretation of it well. It's not wrong if you change something, whether it's because you prefer it or because the original is too difficult to arrange for what you can do. As long as the punters recognise the song and it's played well, it's right.

It's only "wrong" if you're playing something that clearly doesn't work for the song, or playing it badly. It's not wrong to play something that's different from the original - whether it's a solo, the structure, chords or even changing the lyrics if you want to. There are plenty of cover versions by great artists which do all of these things. Sometimes of their own songs.

Criticising other musicians for playing the song "wrong" if they don't play the exact chords, structure, solo etc of the original is missing the point of live music entirely in my opinion. There is no wrong as long as you perform whatever you want to, well.

viz

If it's improvising your own solo or inventing an ending to avoid a fade-out or whatever, then that's fine, and the whole point of live music. When it's an inability to play the correct chords as written however, that's not great. The one I hate is What a Wonderful World, which is in F. On the line "for me and you", the "you" is Dm. Then on the words "and I think to myself" it slips down to Db major, then a ii V I, on Gm, C, F. After the Dm, people often play Bb instead of Db; C instead of Gm-C. Ruins the whole song!

Jimbro66

ICBM said:
 There is no wrong as long as you perform whatever you want to, well.

I'll go along with that, although try doing something like your own off-the-cuff solo to Killer Queen to test that theory

I will always enjoy hearing a band playing a creative and well arranged alternative version of a well known song, more than I would a note-perfect copy of the original. What has me heading for the door is a half-hearted copy of the original because the band can't be arsed to get it right and have a "that'll do" attitude. But that's my personal opinion as a muso and might be quite different to what the audience thinks (and others here think).

FWIW I'd personally rather hear a band playing well-crafted/performed original material than any note-perfect covers.

Placidcasual79

mudslide73 said:

I heard SOF while waiting for chips and shuddered at how wrong our version is. We've made it more complicated than theirs and we add a couple of passing chords that just aren't on the record. Also the intro is nowhere near right either. 

I think you'll find it is THEIR intro that is wrong @mudslide73 - I bet they wish they'd put those passing chords in too!

Flanging_Fred

BahHumbug said:

The 7/8 bit in Times like these.....rendered in 4/4, presumably cos the drummer can't do 7/8.

SOF, as has been mentioned.  Getting everyone to start at the right points needs everyone to have a very good feel for the beat of that intro guitar part.

i saw a band a few weeks ago, doing Sultans of Swing.  The guitarist did a fairly ham fisted attempt at all of Knopfler's original licks.  Then when it got to the arpeggio bit at the end he just strummed some chords very quickly.  Ouch.

Guilty as charged m'lud. When I joined my band we started 'Times like these' and it was a total mess until I figured out they weren't playing in 7/8.

 It still sounds weird to me in 4/4, but I'm not going to be THAT guy, new to the band and telling everyone else they're doing it 'wrong'. Sometimes it's better to bite your tongue for the sake of band togetherness.

robinbowes

ICBM said:

robinbowes said:

I think we're talking about playing the song wrong, rather than not being note-perfect as per the record. I certainly am.

I'm talking about playing the song differently from the original - which is fine, and to be encouraged, as long as you play your interpretation of it well. It's not wrong if you change something, whether it's because you prefer it or because the original is too difficult to arrange for what you can do. As long as the punters recognise the song and it's played well, it's right.

It's only "wrong" if you're playing something that clearly doesn't work for the song, or playing it badly. It's not wrong to play something that's different from the original - whether it's a solo, the structure, chords or even changing the lyrics if you want to. There are plenty of cover versions by great artists which do all of these things. Sometimes of their own songs.

Criticising other musicians for playing the song "wrong" if they don't play the exact chords, structure, solo etc of the original is missing the point of live music entirely in my opinion. There is no wrong as long as you perform whatever you want to, well.

You're saying the same thing as me with different words. My "wrong" is your "not played well".

I've heard many interpretations and re-arrangements that are clearly different to but recognisable as the "original" song, and I applaud those, even if I don't like all of them. I've also heard many songs just played wrong ("not played well", to use your terminology), ie. where the performer plays a major chord instead of a minor because they've got cloth ears.

Call it "wrong", nor "not played well" - I don't really mind.

R.

Voxman

ICBM said:

All of them, hopefully.

If there's one thing I hate more than bands trying to play note-perfect covers, it's musos criticising them for not doing.

Play the song, not the record.

There are some riffs and solo's that are so well known, it really stands out if you don't play it as authentically as reasonably practical - the solo on All Right Now is a classic example.  But other than a few things like that, I completely agree. Even the 'right' chord work doesn't matter although it is probably one of the most 'mis-played' songs ever!  

The most important thing is to get the feel and timing right.  As long as you're playing a few of the key riffs, the audience will know what it is.  It's not even important to get the tone spot-on - just in the ball-park is plenty good enough. When you're playing live, there are so many different external factors anyway, and usually not even the artist can duplicate their studio tone.  When asked about 'Money for nothing' Mark Knopfler went on record saying it was a freak serendipity in the way that certain Laney amps interacted ('phased') in the studio, and even though they measured distances etc and tried it again, they couldn't replicate it.  

There are a handful of bands that are note perfect meticulous and match studio tone very, very closely live - the Eagles come specifically to mind.  But there's no real spontaneity and so you might as well listen to the album!  For me, playing covers live is all about the differences, putting your own feel & interpretation into what you play, and even the mistakes make it yours - hell, most of the artists we revere make mistakes live too!  It's all part of live rock 'n roll! 

With regards to playing things the 'proper' way, it's often a misnomer anyway. Often, there's overdubbing/layering so it's impossible for one guitar to play 'authentically', and also because the original artist often plays it differently themselves, and on albums there's a lot of clever 'trickery' going on.   Cases in point:

• You'll never find a live version of Jimmy Page replicating the solo in Heartbreaker - he ALWAYS plays it completely differently live.  And there's a very good reason for this...it was totally improvised in the studio, and he couldn't remember himself how he did it, so he never tries.  

• Another classic example is Ritchie Blackmore's wonderful solo on Lazy (Machine head album) - you'll never hear him play it anything like the same live for the same reason.  In fact, the album version itself sculpts together (seamlessly) no less than 3 separate takes with the best bits joined together through clever studio jiggery pokery - why? because he couldn't play the whole thing smoothly through himself in one take and each version was different and improvised albeit around a basic theme!   

• And if you want to see evidence of artists playing things differently themselves, look at Jimmy Page's fingering when playing the iconic riff for Communication Breakdown in these two clips.  In the 1968 show he's playing the main riff all in the 5th fret position - in the later clip, he uses 5th and 7th positions which is the way he subsequently plays it now, including at the O2 - so, both are 'proper' ways but different:

1968 - from 1:13


1975 from 1:00

p90fool

ICBM said:

All of them, hopefully.

If there's one thing I hate more than bands trying to play note-perfect covers, it's musos criticising them for not doing.

Play the song, not the record.

I agree, but I tend to see ignoring the subtleties of some songs as a wasted opportunity than as a travesty.

We play Blame it on the Boogie as a 3-piece guitar band so obviously it's not meant to (and doesn't) sound like the record, but I've put a lot of time into creating chord voicings which reflect what's on there even though nobody on the record plays what I'm playing.

Same with things like Warwick Avenue, in pop music terms it's relatively complex stuff and to not bother with those passing notes and major 7ths just sounds lame and lazy to me.

Yes, play the song not the record, but REALLY play the song, not some root-and-fifth teenage version.

Teetonetal

Surely this is about the band not being good enough to work the song out correctly for themselves, so either they get it wrong, or the use an Internet transciption, which can be all kinds of mess...