Covers vs. Orignals

[Johnny 5]

So what would you rather go see, a cover band or original band? And why?

[Mike]

I prefer a cover band that throws in a few originals here and there.
Not a dedicated to one band / genre cover band but a fairly diverse one.
This tend to break up the night a bit. You get to hear some familiar music but at the same time get to check out some original music which is usually pretty interesting.

I think a full night of one band doing all original music sometimes can get a bit draining depending on the music style and the one good thing about a diverse cover band is the diversity.

Just my opinion.

[megahertzldgtr]

i'm gonna catch some heat for this but i think it takes more talent to do a cover correctly (right licks/solos...etc) than it does to write an original...

i'd rather go see a great cover band/tribute band

[fcmonk]

I'd rather go see a good band.

[brookie]

i like to see cover bands because i like to sing along but if i was to see a original band every weekend i would eventually be able to sing along to them too

[nomanzero]

All the comments here back up what veterans of the corporate music business already know. People are attracted to music that they are familiar with. That is why the competition for radio air time is so keen, cutthroat and brutal. Because record companies know that if their product doesn't get to the ears of the public (by which airwaves are still the most effective way to do it, even with the internet and all of that).

In NoManZero, we would love to play all originals knowing that material we have submitted is even getting serious looks by the record industry (we don't post all of our stuff on our site, but even the stuff we do is getting interest). But we know the way the human ear and psyche works, people just don't want to sit and listen to song after song they have never heard before. They are willing to take small doses of quality originals so we thread in some originals into our mostly cover set because that is what time tested observation has proven.

If you are an original band lucky enough to have a huge following without any radio airplay (and there are a few bands even in CT with that), and your audience already has all your tunes on thier Mp3 player or has your CD, then you might get away with all orginals. Othewise, you get 3 to 6 all original bands playing a small club to basically a room full of band guys that play in the rest of the original bands waiting to get on stage. And it is done for free with no compensation to the bands at all.

Nahh, later for that, NoManZero has been getting paid on EVERY show (except fund raisers and good cause shows) which has helped fuel the costs of getting us recordings that have led to yet more opportunities (see band news for a HUGE development for us).

But everyone has an opinion on this subject.....................

[jobu]

As a founding member of the Hartford band Jive Miguel, we've been publicly and unfairly singled out for playing all covers by Dan Berry of the Hartford Advocate. It stung for a while, but while I don't agree with his taking it out on us, especially when he said we were a good band, he was right.

My bandmates and I struggle on a daily basis with our pride. We're a working band, and we know it's because of our covers. I'm making more money now than I did in 12 years in my old band Carfax Abby, which was 50/50 covers/originals. When we started this band, we did so with the notion of playing songs that no one else plays, but everyone knows. We thought this would be a reasonable compromise between bad covers and originals. This direction has worked well for us, but artistically, I'm getting bored. Hence, we're actually in the middle of a mini re-evaluation of our goals.

Let's face it, it's either play covers and work for big money, or play originals for free. We've been playing Foxwoods Casino, and it's pretty much a no-original atmosphere. Club owners and managers want to see people dancing, drinking, and NOT LEAVING. So what do we do? We play "Brick House" while secretly cringing at ourselves. We throw in our one finished original from time to time, but when you got the people up and dancing, you want to keep them there, so it only gets played sporadically. Ugh...I don't know.

Covers can be fun, but the atmosphere in CT and the area is not condusive to original music for the most part. Dan Berry was right, but we want to work and we want to pay the bills. So what choice have we?

[Johnny 5]

Yeah, I read that article jobu. And I agree with you. It was pretty harsh, and it seems that you got scapegoated for the rise in cover bands. I think he decided to review you then instead decided to use your band as a vehicle to get his frustrations out on the state of the scene. The best situation would be a music scene comprised of 50% orignal bands and 50% cover bands at any average bar. I'd say now it's probably more like 98% cover bands out. The original bands are playing, but as nomanzero said, no one's really getting paid. And that's 100% the fault of money. Bar owners don't have bands because they want to hear music, they do it to get people in the bars. And frankly, original bands typically have a fraction of the audience cover bands do. And it's also fair to say that original bands have the most loyal fan base in underage kids who can't go to a bar.

I'd love to see a bar open up in CT or MA that focused on MUSIC as a whole, not covers vs. originals. A bar that does both and promotes the hell out of both.

[fcmonk]

Someone else just got ripped up by Dan Berry recently too. I can understand the point of what he's trying to get across. I love original music, and would love there to be a healthy original scene around here that's not just for jam bands and metal acts. But he's really got the smarmy uppity tone to his articles.

All kinds of music have their place in the landscape. Like I said before, I love seeing original music, but I have seen cover bands that I really enjoyed because they were excellent musicians and/or they took an original angle on well-known songs. Non creative music sucks, whether it's rehash cover bands or overly-derivative original bands. I think Dan missed the point on that one.

[lowestfrequency]

For an average night out I'd prefer to hear a cover band for the same reason as everybody else - familiarity with the songs.

The problem, as has already been touched upon here, is that every band plays the same freakin' songs. I know this isn't always by choice. My band spent a year putting together a set list to differentiate ourselves from everyone and we couldn't get anyone up and dancing at most clubs. As soon as we jammed twenty party 'standards' in we started to see some shakin' booty.

The market dictates what flies and a cover band's demographic is the girls in whatever age range you want to hit. Where there are girls there will be guys. And those girls like certain songs.

[fcmonk]

One of the side effects of the originals/covers debate is finding a band in the first place. The easiest way to prevent people from answering your ad is to put "original" somewhere in the text. It's so hard to find original bands, and there are so few out there that the offers you get are usually not your style. I have an idea in mind, but really none have been close. But if you want to be in a cover band, you can get a gig pretty easily if you have any ability in your instrument. The prospect of making money probably doesn't help either.

I've been looking for a new original project for about five months now and so far nothing, not even a sniff. I'm getting to the point I'll either have to "settle" for covers just to get out and gig, or quit altogether.