Having spent some time looking at what a cover version is, and the different types of cover that exist, it’s time to take a look at some examples and, eventually, produce a personal top 10 of favourite covers.
First, though, let’s have a look at 3 different takes of a classic post-punk/new wave/industrial single – Joy Division’s iconic Love Will Tear Us Apart. I’ve selected 3 different versions. The first is by the original artist, Joy Division (1980 FAC23), the second a cover by Paul Young (1984) and the third a cover by Nina Persson (live performance 2015).
Starts with a throbbing bass overlaid with semi-acoustic guitar playing chords on its own, front of the mix. The sound is quite sparse and the texture increases as the drums enter, with a synth playing the main theme.
The overall sound is sparse and “industrial” – there are virtually no overdubs or layering of instruments or voices and there are no backing vocals (which are relatively backgrounded in the mix). The power of the song comes from this simplicity and sparseness, coupled with the lyrics. Most of the sound is centrally-located with little or no stereo effects.
This cover was released towards the end of the “New Romantic” pop genre and the opening bars immediately indicate a completely different take on the song. The drums and bass are high in the mix, the bass drum particularly so, with a different rhythm to the original. There is no slow build-up – the song opens loud and bombastic. The entrance of the vocals (with echo and a variation of the melodic line) is accompanied by background synth effects and a diminuation of the accompaniment. The vocals in the “chorus” are augmented by overdubs. A piano plays the melody in the background during the first break following the chours. In the next verse a backing “ahh” chorus can be heard, followed by a dreadful spoken version of the lyric. A “lead” guitar solo is introduced before the next verse. The lyric “Do you cry out in your sleep” is accompanied by a cacophony of non-musical noises, presumably designed to show distress since the vocalist is not apparently able to supply this themselves. At this point I stopped listening as I’d forgotten how dreadful this version was. If one did not know any better, one would be hard-pressed to identify it as the same song; thus on the “cover spectrum” this is in the far end, re-interpretation region.
Persson starts with a pianist playing Chopin’s raindrop prelude; following this the first verse is sung with solo voice, accompanied by piano. At this point one could be forgiven for thinking this is yet another take on the song – acoustic, unplugged version (although Persson’s voice does have some emotional power). However, the band then join in and produce a sound not dissimilar to the original – similar instrumentation and structure to the song and the emotional content is provided from the vocalist without the need for effects. Overall I like this version very much as I think it brings something different to the song while retaining the power of the original.
The term “cover” was originally used to refer to a version of a written song recorded by several artists; it now has the accepted meaning of being a recorded version of a previously recorded song, often an admired or influential song, by someone other than the original artist or artists.
The recording of a cover version can be undertaken for several reasons and the artistic approach to the new recording can take several forms. These can range from virtually identical copies through a spectrum of versions which change both the musical landscape and lyrical structure and, possibly, meaning. While the purpose can be open to debate (didactic, homage, tribute) some insight into the process can be obtained by close examination of the musical content, performance approaches and production values. Let’s look at an example.
Mr Brightside
The Killers released the original version of Mr Brightside so, by definition, this is the benchmark performance of the song. The song begins with an introductory guitar riff (0:00 – 0:07) playing single, arpeggio notes in LH channel only. The first verse begins immediately at 0:07 – 0:20, when the vocals enter along with other instruments, namely electric bass, drums (both situated centrally) and cymbals mainly in the RH channel. The guitar riff continues in LH throughout the first verse.
The vocal style is distorted, most likely a post-production effect added at the final mixing stage. Verse 2 (0:21 – 0:33) continues as verse 1, and additional texture is added this time via guitar overdubs. There is relatively little melodic interest at this point and harmonically the song is based round two chords with a supertonic harmony in the bass. (I and IV). From the bridge section at 0:34 – 0:58 we hear a heavier sound; the guitar riff is heavier and more distorted, the bass is higher in the mix and the drumming becomes more forceful and insistent. Overall the feeling is angsty and distressed, reflecting the lyrical content. This leads into the chorus at 0:59 – 1:24 where the singer (Brandon Flowers) reverts to a more melodic style. The accompaniment includes several chord changes backing a more conventional vocal style.
A short solo at 1:26 – 1:37 is the main feature of the instrumental break, consisting of repeated notes of broken chords, in line with the earlier chord structure. Verse 1 repeats from 1:37 – 1:50, a straight reprise. An echo is heard on the vocals at 1:44 and the phrase “It was only a kiss” is repeated, the second time being very distorted, almost like over a low fidelity line, such as a phone line. Following a repeat of the bridge at 2:01 – 2:28, the chorus is also repeated (2:29 – 2:55) with the same backing on guitar as the earlier solo. More guitar overdubs are added and a variation of the solo at 1:26 is played from 2:56 – 3:07; from 3:02 to 3:07 the guitarist plays a version of Beethoven’s 9th Symphony “Ode to Joy” theme. This leads on to more intense drumming and the beginning of the outro from 3:08 – 3:32. The phrase “I never” is repeated several times with different melodic structure, over a background of feedback, ending at 3:33 – 3:42 with a non-conventional cadential ending – ending on the dominant.dominant. The use of Beethoven’s theme and similarities to a song by David Bowie (Queen Bitch, from the Hunky Dory album) shows that The Killers are not above taking a flexible approach to re-using (without covering) previous material.
Paul Anka’s version begins with a short introduction (0:00 – 0:26) which is played twice (repeated from 0:14 with some variation in the instruments). The instrumentation consists of a small jazz band ensemble; trumpets, saxophone, drums and bass (possibly acoustic). When the vocal enters for verse 1 (0:27) the backing becomes more restrained, with quiet drumming, bass and the introduction of a piano, more akin to a jazz trio.
Anka uses numerous changes in phrasing, starting here (from 0:40 to 0:52), and used throughout the rest of the song. From 0:53 to 1:18, the band take over in a traditional “solo” phase where each instrument takes it in turn to play a short motif. The first chorus enters at 1:18 – 1:43 displaying more exaggeration of the melody, an intricate accompaniment (muted trumpets/horns) and articulated phrasing, finishing with a short drum flourish. At 1:44 – 2:21 the singer repeats the phrase “Mr Brightside”, and this segment includes a short sax solo (at 01:57) with other woodwind joining in, accompanied by muted horns in the background.
From 2:22 – 2:35 the singer misses out verse 1 and goes straight to a reprise of verse 2, this time with a more detailed accompaniment. Staccato horn blasts as punctuation chords are quite noticeable. From 2:36 – 2:43 we hear another instrumental break – sounds almost like an ending, but it’s fake as we then hear loud horns, running into a repeat of the chorus from 2:44 – 3:04. The chorus is repeated, with variations in phrasing and ending with an emphatic statement “I’m Mr Brightside !!!” From 3:04 – 3:44 he repeats “I’m Mr Brightside” , introducing improvised additional lyrics “I am Mr Brightside” … “You can call me Brightside”, with the whole song ending in a triumphant style totally unlike the original.
The Killers’ version of the song has a binary AAB AAB’ structure, with each of the verses and chorus repeated once. In the second repeat, the bridge, solo and outro are varied slightly. In overall structure, melody and harmony the song is fairly simple, containing no obvious modulations. Anka’s version, on the other hand, has a more fluid structure with a longer introduction, more complex bridges and no exact repeats of either the verses or the chorus.
In The Killers’ version, the melody in the verse covers a limited range and is based on a simple repeated motif (0:21 – 0:33). The chorus, which first appears at 0:59 – 1:24, displays more variation in melody, rising and falling, and ending on a descending scale at 1:24. Anka adds much more melodic variation in his version, in keeping with the overall style which is broadly “swing/jazz”. At 0:27 – 0:39, for example, he introduces much more melodic range and uses considerable embellishment of the basic melody. The lyrical material in the verse is also changed, not quite beyond recognition but enough to make the song seem vaguely unfamiliar.
In terms of tempo and rhythm, The Killers’ version is a conventional 4/4 throughout and is taken at a quick tempo (approx. crotchet = 148). Anka’s approach is slower, with a more relaxed and improvisatory feel to it, though the speed of the beat is almost identical. Both songs last almost exactly the same time, the apparent discrepancy is due to Anka’s version missing out a verse repeat (and filling some of the additional musical space with instrumental solos). Harmonically, the song is based on a few chords in the verse and another few different chords in the chorus and bridge. Texturally, the version by The Killers is limited to a relatively small range of instruments – electric guitar, electric bass, drums and vocals with some overdubbing of the electric guitar. The harmonic accompaniment in Anka’s version is more complex, covering a wider range of instruments and timbres.
The Killers’ approach to performance gives the impression of a young, indie rock band who take the content of the lyrics seriously – Flowers is describing feelings of betrayal, jealousy and angst (often associated with teenagers or young adults and forming the subject of countless songs) apparently based on a real incident. There are some features of the vocal style (the use of echo, the distortion at 1:44) which support this interpretation and create an impression in the listener.
Anka’s approach, however, is to turn this into a swing/jazz, slightly up tempo, song; perhaps focusing on the redemptive qualities of the song title. In many cases he chooses to emphasise the Bright in Mr Brightside and so is maybe trying to convey that he is distraught, but positive and able to overcome these feelings; possibly as a result of his more advanced years.
The Killers use various production techniques to complement and articulate the “meaning” of the song, including the use of stereo effects. In the introduction, the guitar plays in the LH channel and other instruments are added to the RH channel and centre as they are brought into the mix. The drums and vocals are centre, but by the second verse (0:27) the drums are near the front and the vocals are further back. They also use guitar overdubs (2:38 – 2:50 for example) and vocal effects (1:48) to create an aural effect to accompany the feelings being described in the lyrics.
On the other hand, Anka’s production is in the style of a lounge singer, with a relatively modest instrumental accompaniment. There is little attempt to use unusual stereo or other audio effects (apart from the opening which has horns in RH and the rest of the instruments in the centre). In fact the overall impression is of a clean production with minimal studio effects. This may well be deliberate in that they would be able to reproduce this relatively easily in a live environment. According to the definitions given by Toynbee, Ankas’ version can be regarded as a recording as construction, i.e. the process itself is important and there is little attempt to imitate or faithfully reproduce the original (Toynbee, 2015). Of course, the original is also a construction, in part, since there is no definitive score to work from. However, Toynbee’s approach would put the original recording more heavily in the recording as documentation camp.
There is a spectrum of possibilities for cover versions, ranging from exact copies, stylistic re-interpretations to out and out ideological attacks . Anka’s version sits somewhere on this spectrum and is an example of what Rings refers to as “ … generic resetting, the presenting of a song in a genre different from that of the original. “
It remains an open question what exactly Anka had in mind – possibly an attempt to claim the song for an older generation or possibly just a conviction that the song would be suited to his style of singing and musical arrangement.
Rings argues that the success of these covers is down to the allure of the cover version being used to manipulate listeners’ expectations. He also argues that listeners’ listening experience can be enriched by engagement with the meaning of the song, thus it is imperative that the meaning remains clear. He further argues that for the listener of the cover to appreciate that the cover is a “cover” and not an original piece of work, some reference to the original must exist and the covering artist themselves must take some responsibility in ensuring that the saturated allusion, to use Ring’s phrase, works (Rings, 2013).
Rings also states that generic resetting allows the performer to achieve their aims, whatever they may be, in undertaking a cover version while still allowing the relevant appreciation paradigm to exist and provide a context for audiences to engage with the performance and recording (Rings, 2013). It’s possible that Anka is undertaking such an endeavor – he is entering a dialogue regarding this piece of music, allowing a conversation to take place with otherwise disparate audiences.
It is clear that Paul Anka’s version is located on the spectrum of covers closer to the definition of a rendition cover; he has taken it and put his own slant on it to such an extent that it is, in some respects, a completely new song.
Rings, M (2013), ‘Doing It Their Way: Rock Covers, Genre, and Appreciation’, Journal Of Aesthetics & Art Criticism, 71, 1, pp. 55-63
Not the most encouraging thing you want to hear from a fellow electric vehicle owner. Mind you, he was just driving up and down the motorway network in a Mitsubishi.
We were planning on taking an electric camper van to one of the remotest parts of the country.
In the bad old days, if you wanted to pay a large sum of money to someone there were 3 main options
Write a cheque
Place wad of cash in brown envelope
Get a banker’s draft
The first one worked pretty well, but needed 3 days in clearing so the bank could use your money to make money for themselves. The second also worked well, provided you had a bodyguard and planned on making the payment in daylight hours. The final option was best, but the banks still got their cut by charging you for the privilege of spending your own money.
In the shiny new digital age, one could be forgiven that walking up to a chip and pin machine and making the necessary transaction would be simple enough. Oh no siree.
Step 1 – Transaction rejected by merchant’s provider. Place call to said provider for manual authorisation. After about 20 mins on the phone, going through all the checks etc. the merchant is told to try again.
Step 2 – Try again. Failed. Repeat Step 1. “Maybe it’s the customers bank that is the problem”. Top advice.
Step 3 – Customer, i.e. me, calls telephone banking to find out what is going on. Once we’ve established I’m trying to use my card, not online banking, I’m told that all looks OK and there is indeed a note on my account warning that I’m going to be making a large payment. This is good, since I’d called them some days previously to warn of this very event. We try again and transaction is rejected again. This time (after scuttling off to find someone senior) it turns out that the card provider Visa, not the bank, have put a transaction limit on the card (not the account). That would have been nice to know in advance, but hey ho. Best suggestion from them is to try and put the payment through in two smaller chunks.
Step 4 – Repeat Step 1, but for half the price of the ‘van. Transaction fails (surprise surprise), call the merchant’s provider, get manual authorisation and force the transaction through. Success !!
Step 5 – Repeat for the balance. What could go wrong? Transaction failed again, called the provider and now they are complaining that two suspicious transactions are going through one after the other (can’t argue with that, apart from the suspicious bit). Advise them that the bank said this was the best approach and, reluctantly, having given the merchant a bit of a ticking off, the second half is processed and we are done.
Total transaction time from start to finish, approx. 1 hour and 15mins. I kid you not.
So, today’s tip of the day is
Make sure you have all the necessary parties involved in the payment onside, or you could be in for a long wait by the cash register, before you even pick up your shiny Motorhome.
Be afraid. Be very afraid. Be very, very afraid. I could go on, but you get the picture.
Today’s the day – I will leave the office driving a Toyota, drive to Hayes Leisure somewhere near IKEA, M5, and return driving an Autoquest 145 something or other Motorhome. Lord help us, as I have no idea what I’m doing. Let’s hope I can at least drive the thing home without incident and get it parked in the driveway without trashing anything. Let’s start with small targets.
Motorhomes for Idiots 