Cabinetman
A-List Customer
- Messages
- 331
- Location
- Central Illinois
The beauty of music - there are several beauties so I'll say, "A" beauty of music is that it is written for everybody. There are songs I have heard "mere individuals" do that are just, "Wow!" They're not recording it, but merely singing or playing it. Maybe they're not even performing it, just singing or playing for the mere love of it and enjoyment they get out of it. How about singing in the shower? I suppose that is where many say is the ONLY the place they sing . Oh, this is too much. I think a good song depends on and begins with the composer and lyricist. I mean, that is the song. To be heard involves interpretation by both the performer(s) and the listener.
Cover - is a cover a cover if you never hear the original? Shucks, what is the original? Especially if several folks record it at virtually the same time.
Version - You know, FS recorded over 1300 songs. Boy, he was one to "vers" and revise numbers and record them two or three times...and, of course, be successful with them all. Who was the orchestra? Who conducted? Who arranged? What was Frank's mood at that point in his life - at that very moment, for that matter?
Remake - I think I, too, would define this as something occurring well after the initial popularity of a given tune.
But they're really all the same thing, aren't they? Cover, version, remake, revival, interpretation, arrangement, etc. Music is timeless. A particular song's "life" may have a beginning, but there is no end. Obviously there is popularity, and that's what the industry cares about, I guess.
Gosh, I just realized the amount of music that gets written that "no one" has ever heard, and the shelves and hard drives that must be full of unreleased material. That also brings to light, for me, that a song may well have a death, afterall.
Whatever all that was worth, I mostly like the "popularized originals". There just seems to be something more pure about it, and hopefully that means it is being done in a way that the author(s) had in mind. And I look at it as a singer, myself. It gives me something very basic (I don't mean uninteresting) to build on. It is hard for me to hear contemporary artists, who in all probability have already made a career for themselves, now releasing their versions of the "old stuff." It's wonderful they are successful and they have an audience, but it is awfully hard for me to stomach in many cases. No, I am not buying their albums, nor am I seeking them out otherwise. I mean, if I find myself in a store, for example, with the background music (which maybe isn't background enough). I can't control it or get away from it. Yes, technically, I could leave the store.
I'll close with saying that the open mind believes that the artist is honoring the song, itself. Those that love the song want to continue to share it with the masses. Then it's up to the masses to decide which guy or gal they want to hear. It is necessary (a personal realization) to have songs available to us in more than one way.
Cover - is a cover a cover if you never hear the original? Shucks, what is the original? Especially if several folks record it at virtually the same time.
Version - You know, FS recorded over 1300 songs. Boy, he was one to "vers" and revise numbers and record them two or three times...and, of course, be successful with them all. Who was the orchestra? Who conducted? Who arranged? What was Frank's mood at that point in his life - at that very moment, for that matter?
Remake - I think I, too, would define this as something occurring well after the initial popularity of a given tune.
But they're really all the same thing, aren't they? Cover, version, remake, revival, interpretation, arrangement, etc. Music is timeless. A particular song's "life" may have a beginning, but there is no end. Obviously there is popularity, and that's what the industry cares about, I guess.
Gosh, I just realized the amount of music that gets written that "no one" has ever heard, and the shelves and hard drives that must be full of unreleased material. That also brings to light, for me, that a song may well have a death, afterall.
Whatever all that was worth, I mostly like the "popularized originals". There just seems to be something more pure about it, and hopefully that means it is being done in a way that the author(s) had in mind. And I look at it as a singer, myself. It gives me something very basic (I don't mean uninteresting) to build on. It is hard for me to hear contemporary artists, who in all probability have already made a career for themselves, now releasing their versions of the "old stuff." It's wonderful they are successful and they have an audience, but it is awfully hard for me to stomach in many cases. No, I am not buying their albums, nor am I seeking them out otherwise. I mean, if I find myself in a store, for example, with the background music (which maybe isn't background enough). I can't control it or get away from it. Yes, technically, I could leave the store.
I'll close with saying that the open mind believes that the artist is honoring the song, itself. Those that love the song want to continue to share it with the masses. Then it's up to the masses to decide which guy or gal they want to hear. It is necessary (a personal realization) to have songs available to us in more than one way.