covers

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by jahannam what's creating then, "L" ???
lol
don't people say GOD CREATED LIFE? isn't that the ultimate usage of the word?
how am I not making sense?
enlighten me please...

Since we are speaking of human creation, let's leave God out of the equation for now.

A construction worker creates a bridge - from pre-existing stones and metals.

An artist creates a painting, most likely from naturally occuring plant pigmentation.

A singer creates an individualized interpretation of a song, whether or not it is his/her song. The sound waves emerging from the throat of the singer are unique to that singer, as are the feelings evoked in the listener. Same things goes with the entire band. Whether or not the song is their's, each instrument player, if they are good, will have something unique and wonderful to offer. That is why philharmonic's exist. The Los Angeles rendition of any given symphony will be subtly different from say, the Sydney version. It's all in the nuance, and when it comes to pop music, it isn't always all that subtle. Take one of my examples - The Cowboy Junkies cover of "Walking after Midnight." The words are the same as Patsy Cline's, but nothing else is. The recording bears almost no resemblance to the original. Listen to both and then tell me that the band was not being creative. Besides, creativity is not the issue here to begin with. The issue is whether or not a cover can be as good or better than the original. I contend that there is no question that it can be. The worst band can write a wonderful song, but have no idea what to do with it. A better band can then come along and turn that wonderful song into a wonderful record.

[felizitation]

Originally posted by jahannam what's creating then, "L" ???
lol
don't people say GOD CREATED LIFE? isn't that the ultimate usage of the word?
how am I not making sense?
enlighten me please...

Creating is no more no less materializing. This something can be ideas (table square shapped), feelings (taste, mood, pain)

[jahannam]

Originally posted by loseyourname Since we are speaking of human creation, let's leave God out of the equation for now.

A construction worker creates a bridge - from pre-existing stones and metals.

An artist creates a painting, most likely from naturally occuring plant pigmentation.

A singer creates an individualized interpretation of a song, whether or not it is his/her song. The sound waves emerging from the throat of the singer are unique to that singer, as are the feelings evoked in the listener. Same things goes with the entire band. Whether or not the song is their's, each instrument player, if they are good, will have something unique and wonderful to offer. That is why philharmonic's exist. The Los Angeles rendition of any given symphony will be subtly different from say, the Sydney version. It's all in the nuance, and when it comes to pop music, it isn't always all that subtle. Take one of my examples - The Cowboy Junkies cover of "Walking after Midnight." The words are the same as Patsy Cline's, but nothing else is. The recording bears almost no resemblance to the original. Listen to both and then tell me that the band was not being creative. Besides, creativity is not the issue here to begin with. The issue is whether or not a cover can be as good or better than the original. I contend that there is no question that it can be. The worst band can write a wonderful song, but have no idea what to do with it. A better band can then come along and turn that wonderful song into a wonderful record.

what??
first of all we were talking about creativity.
we weren't talking about "creating"
cuz we BUILD or DESIGN bridges, we don't create them.
and we COMPOSE music, we don't create it.
so your examples were pretty out of place.
second of all, when a song is written for the first time a certain way, that is the way its composer thinks it sounds best, as a matter of fact that certain WAY is the composition of the song/artwork=that WAY IS the song!!
therefore, by changing that composition, you're simply COPYING someone else's idea and adding your own "twist" to it, and to me, that is not "creative".
it's work, but it's not characterized by originality.

[felizitation]

Originally posted by jahannam what??
first of all we were talking about creativity.
we weren't talking about "creating"
cuz we BUILD or DESIGN bridges, we don't create them.
and we COMPOSE music, we don't create it.
so your examples were pretty out of place.
second of all, when a song is written for the first time a certain way, that is the way its composer thinks it sounds best, as a matter of fact that certain WAY is the composition of the song/artwork=that WAY IS the song!!
therefore, by changing that composition, you're simply COPYING someone else's idea and adding your own "twist" to it, and to me, that is not "creative".
it's work, but it's not characterized by originality.

I'm into bad mood
There is no more creativity, there is only bridges everywhere.
And whatever you say tonight I would strongly disagree with you


I'll restart the post tomorrow, for now I really really need to sleep

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by jahannam what??
first of all we were talking about creativity.
we weren't talking about "creating"
cuz we BUILD or DESIGN bridges, we don't create them.
and we COMPOSE music, we don't create it.
so your examples were pretty out of place.
second of all, when a song is written for the first time a certain way, that is the way its composer thinks it sounds best, as a matter of fact that certain WAY is the composition of the song/artwork=that WAY IS the song!!
therefore, by changing that composition, you're simply COPYING someone else's idea and adding your own "twist" to it, and to me, that is not "creative".
it's work, but it's not characterized by originality.

The bridge was not there before. Construction workers, who did not design the thing, by the way, put up some things that are not themselves bridges, together they come, and wow, there's a bridge. The bridge was created.

As I said before, there is no act of lyrical creativity involved in covering a song. But a record is more than a set of lyrics. It isn't about adding a twist, not with truly good covers. It's about building a recording, step by step, from the ground up, with nothing but words to work from. It's the same way it works for any band that does not write its own songs, or for that matter, any band where the songwriter does not arrange the music.

And no, this thread was not about creativity. It was about good covers. A record can be enjoyable, can be good, without being particularly inventive.