Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!"Wherever I go, there I am"From: e I am)@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA> Newsgroups: net.music Subject: Cover Versions Message-ID: <6221@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Fri, 30-Nov-84 09:31:03 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.6221 Posted: Fri Nov 30 09:31:03 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 4-Dec-84 05:56:08 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 17 Mike Pawka claims that "...in order for a song to qualify as a 'cover' version, it should get the artist more fame and fortune than the original, or at the least as much as the original." Wrongo, Mike -- you're confusing esthetics (or, at least, the judgement of the buying public [about which Frank Zappa once commented that "Bad Taste is Timeless"]) with the basic fact of what a cover version is, to wit, a re-make of any song originally recorded by another artist, no matter how good or bad the remake may be. Fame and fortune are totally irrelevant to whether or not a song's a cover version -- all that matters is whether or not it's the original. That's not to say that originality can't be used in creating a cover version, especially as regards vocal style, instrumentation, and arrangement, but those are matters of taste and don't make the song any more or less a cover version. --Dave