Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Renditions = Good or Bad?

  1. #1

    Exclamation Renditions = Good or Bad?

    I was riding in the car with my mom on the way home when Fall Out Boy's rendition of Micheal Jackson's 'Beat It' played on the radio. She exclaimed "Another revival? Does the musicians now have any originality?" in Filipino. Me, being a young punk/rock/metal loving teenager, actually preferred it a bit over the original. But I still love the original. My point is: Are revivals good or bad?

    I mean, the adults are enjoying the music from their time but most are disliking the music now and vise versa for the teenagers. But from what I see, the bands and artists now are just trying to give old song a twist so that people now could enjoy music then. But, why are the people who grew up listening to the original versions complaining? I understand that the original version is the best version (most of the time), but isn't it good that young people now are enjoying their music? I want your opinions over this subject. Some people say that originals shouldn't be revived but most people I know hate the originals while revived capture more people. I really am confused.
    Last edited by cassiopeian; 07-05-2008 at 02:17.

  2. #2
    Serial Under Achiever Tiggi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    United Kingdom


    Hi Cassiopeian,

    I guess cover versions can be good if the intention behind them is good. Throughout history musicians have ripped each other off for ideas, but during the 60's artists started to write & record their own material more often, so cheap cash-in covers can appear to be a lazy way of cashing in on a song that's already been successful.

    If an artist covers a song because they love it, and try to do something new with it, then I don't see a problem.

  3. #3
    Record Label Executive
    Join Date
    Feb 2014


    Just reviving a good song that's gotten lost in the mist of time or flood of newer material is a good thing. Whether the motive is a respite from having to scout up new material, a career change to vintage or whatever--bottom line: is it respectful (not aping, just in light of will do)? This is surely never an issue in the classical or even jazz world--how else you gonna learn if you don't cover The Essentials? And burnish your chops, being measured against standard or variant renditions? It's just in the more pop-centric world, everything is supposed to be minty fresh and brand-y new. Rubbish. Change the beat, transverse the chords, do what you gotta but get it out there and learn from it. I give a rabid rabbit's rectum less the motivation--what're the results? And where is that musician/singer going next?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts