It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Here's a link to our version -
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-I--CQF3aw_cnpDUTNPNTRRWkU
R.
Eqd Speaker Cranker clone
Monte Allums TR-2 Plus mod kit
Trading feedback: http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/60602/
The instrumental bit in that has done my head in, so I just busk that with chords following the bass.
Sue Lawley / Alistair Crowley...
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.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Supportact said: [my style is] probably more an accumulation of limitations and bad habits than a 'style'.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Eqd Speaker Cranker clone
Monte Allums TR-2 Plus mod kit
Trading feedback: http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/60602/
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:
1968 - from 1:13
1975 from 1:00
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.