-
Is it sacrilege to like a cover more than the classic original?
Listened to Scott McKenzie’s San Francisco one day on Youtube, and then I clicked on MLTs San Francisco that suddenly appeared and I was blown away. As good as Scott McKenzie’s incredible original was over all these years, MLTs version grabbed me deeper, then I heard California Dreaming, Hotel California…slew of Beatles and it took me to emotional depths the originals never quite did before.
I think one of MLTs genius is the uncanny ability to hear a song and envision what is missing or can be improved upon, or add some interesting flair to it like the classical guitar runs in Time of The Season. Their incomparable harmonies alone can transform a song as well. Before I discovered Mona and Lisa, I was of the mindset covers did not add any value, and if I wanted to hear a Beatles song, I would rather hear the Beatles do it than someone else, but MLT blew that notion out of the water for me. They are the exception to that rule. I always liked Karen Carpenters Mr Post Man better than the Marvettes originals, then the Beatles version more when I heard it, and now MLTs Mr Postman is the gold standard. For the vast majority of the time MLTs originals are on par or better than the originals, and usually the latter.
What are other members thoughts on this matter? Is it sacrilege to like a cover or even think a cover version can be better than a classic original?
-
33 Replies
-
Jung
Great Post. I agree Mona and Lisa do such a good job covering songs, in some cases? I feel is better than the original. I know some may disagree with me and that is ok. I love their covers, and to this point? No one but no one can cover the Beatles that is now Mona and Lisa. Sanfranciso is a perfect example, Scott did a wonderful job on this and I still love his version and Mona and Lisa took it to another level for me. As you know I love the Stones and The Last Time is a classic and the Mona Lisa Twins took it to another level again for me and I have not looked back. So no shame in loving a classic cover, to me it just shows the power of our music and it still stands today in 2021.-
Hi Bill. During the Beatles week live stream they did in the summer where they featured many artists cover songs of the Beatles including the MLT, I sat in for several hours, and there were lots of great performances, but man, none of them could hold a candle to Mona and Lisa!
BTW, I’ve always enjoyed the Stones and think they are one of the greatest bands of all time. I especially love their superb ballads like Angie, Wild Horses, As Tears Go By etc. Back in the 80’s I had one of their albums that featured some great songs, and I think some of the best 80s songs I liked were by the Rolling Stones, songs like Shattered, Start Me Up, She’s So Cold, Just My Imagination, Waiting on A Friend (another couple of superb ballads), Going to a Go-Go, Hang Fire etc.. My favourite all time Stones song would be a tie between Satisfaction, and Brown Sugar. MLTs Rolling Stones covers are supreme, The Last Time, and Paint It Black. I use to have a neighbour who was a huge Rolling Stones fan, and he came across my post of MLTs cover of The Last Time on Facebook, and he came over to rave about it after seeing this and other MLT Youtube videos.
-
-
I think this is a common thread here. I have also seen utube and Facebook comments of “OMG This is better than the original”.
My wife always says she likes Lola better, because it is easier to understand the lyrics. High five to the recording engineer(s).
It’s one thing for an artist to cover a song and attempt to sound exactly like the original, but when they can modify it to match their style and still convey all of the subtle nuances of the original, bravo. Talk about a run on sentence? For example, when I listen to MLT’s version of She’s Leaving, my mind hears violins where they should be.
No, I do not think it is sacrilege to like a cover better. I think it is about the highest compliment one can bestow on an artist. It must be pretty exciting for the team,”Your version of this song is way better than the Kinks, Beatles, Who”…wow, pretty kool.
JP
-
Hi JP, I’m the same. Whenever I play Mona & Lisa’s cover of Imagine, I keep ‘hearing’ the drums come in after the first verse [A La John Lennon] even though MLT don’t have any. I guess its’ what you’re used to.
-
-
I assume that was a rhetorical question, Jung, but my answer is an emphatic no. I’ve never been one to believe that the first version of anything is necessarily the best. If it were, we’d all still be driving around in Model T’s.
-
In most forms of music, the question would have no meaning (say in Jazz, Folk/Traditional, Classical) – it’s only in the past 60-70 years mainly in pop and rock orientated music that even the idea that a classic original version is the best could have validity.
But even then, the recording accepted as sacrosanct is only a single performance, albeit possibly recorded in a studio with the ability to retake and mix to get a perfect result as the performer(s) see it.
However, the same performer(s) might play the same song a few days later it a totally different way – is that later performance somehow less valid than the earlier? And quite often people prefer later live versions to studio recordings (PF’s ‘Comfortably Numb or ‘Shine On’ for example)
And its not necessarily the best known version which is the original – say “The First Time Ever I Saw Her Face”, which most people would likely associate with Roberta Flack, but is far removed from it’s original by Ewan MacColl & Peggy Seeger.
There are perhaps some (but few) songs that have canonical versions – “Bohemian Rhapsody” immediately comes to mind, where the actual sound of the studio recording and the way it is put together, is part of what it makes it ‘classic’. Bowie’s ‘Space Oddity’ also comes to mind.
Music is not intended to be ‘set in stone’, it evolves, sometimes regresses (according to taste), can be redefined and rediscovered according to generation and style.
And although I claimed the original “Bohemian Rhapsody” as perhaps canonical, it does not mean that enjoyable performances cannot hold their own and are equally valid in their own right…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_XVrm6zXmw
ps to myself – must get round to doing intro post 🙂
-
Alan, Thanks for posting this Bohemian Rhapsody by the Petersen. They did a great job. Love the Country style.
Hey Jung, I think the correct answer to your question. I will keep it short and sweet. Music is all personal and it comes down to the what you think. I like different version of a song or and album. I bought a version of the Rock Opera Tommy by the Hillbenders. They do a hillbilly country version of the opera. I enjoy that as much as the original. I remember Johnnypee posted a version of Sgt Peppers by a group called the Easy Stars Dub Band and they did Pepper with a Jamaican Reggae Style and I love it. It your own interpretation and what you think and like that matters. That’s all that counts.
-
-
Excellent analysis, Alan! I hope you will weigh in on a lot of forum topics. I love these sorts of deep dives.
-
Jung, et al,
I think we tend to favor what we hear first.
We don’t always hear the original first.
(or at least i don’t).But there are some truly great 2nd versions.
BlackBerry Smoke joining Bob Weir on Deep Elem Blues just floors me.
EVERYTHING they do that you’ve heard before is special.In most cases i think the Twins have done a great job of applying a fresh coat of paint.
That was the idea behind N.A. Classics.The very few exceptions IMHO are the songs that have been covered enough already.
Both Sides Now, Johnny B. Goode, Hotel California.
(The Eagles have four versions of Hotel California).But even then there are exceptions.
Here Comes The Sun is great.
I would have never suggested “Yesterday” but Lisa nails it.
And everyone and his brother has recorded “Yesterday”.
Well except for Mike McGear.Cheers
-
Ok, I’m going to be the oddball quirky one here… If you’re comparing strictly MLT covers to originals, my answer is for most part, Equal, as I love both versions and cannot decide , so I stay neutral with treating them as Equally fab, original and MLT versions, but if you’re meaning in general, then I will say yes in some cases, the covers do better than original and perhaps a few I think Equal too… it really depends on who is doing the remakes, this is my opinion and 2 cents worth, you can respectfully disagree or agree… To me I think it all boils down to personal preferences.
-
Wow, some awesome feedback there, love it, and couldn’t agree with you all more. Great musical minds think alike! 😉
-
I think their Starman is better than David Bowie!!!
-
Hi Diana, Agreed, and they filmed the video in Lanzarote, one of my favourite holiday haunts. What’s not to like!
-
-
Although I’ve always tended to prefer the first version of a song that I heard there are exceptions, For example ELOs Roll Over Beethoven was equal to the Beatles version (which was better than the original in my opinion). But the twins are at a whole nother level! They don’t just cover songs they make them uniquely there own while staying faithful to the original! so I would choose their covers to almost every original! (as it says in a famous meme Prove me wrong!)
-
Bob Dylan is a brilliant song writer, but his voice grates on my wife’s nerves, so she much prefers covers of his songs much more than any of his originals. My point is that if you prefer a different singers voice then it stands to reason that you will like the cover more than the original. In MLT’s case, by covering songs that were mostly written my males singers, they add a female flavor to their covers that some (such as us) might find refreshing. Add to that their incredible talent with instruments and you have the perfect formula to produce covers that easily rival even The Beatles’ originals.
-
Excellent point. I love Dylan probably the best song writer ever. A lot of people do not like his singing. I don’t mind it that much. He has done some excellent singing at times. The Desire album was good singing with Emmy Lou Harris and of course Rainy Day Women and Like a Rolling Stone and others. But I agree with you Lynn other performer do a better job. Jimi with my favorite Dylan song All Along the Watch Tower. I also will say the same with Springsteen. Other artist have done better jobs with his songs Mannford Man Blinded By the Light. The Pointer Sisters version of Fire to name a few.
-
-
I agree that Desire and Blood on the Tracks were Dylan’s best vocal efforts.
But it’s often refreshing to hear someone else sing his songs.Even croaky Stephen Stills
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGNG-W5scCE -
Lol.. woohoo, someone else agrees with me on the annoyance of Bob Dylan’s voice, how it too, gets on my nerves and agree wholeheartedly, in preference of others singing his stuff over him singing his own , good to know I’m not alone in this…lol????
-
Hi Jacki, I agree: Dylan was a great songwriter, no question about that, but singer??? Voice like a cross-saw.
-
-
Hi Tom, Never heard this version of Stills doing this song. A great version. Another album that Dylan sang good on was Street Legal. I always like his version of Knocking On Heavens Door. But Guns & Roses did a great job on that song.
-
My simple answer is it is not. I would think that an artist/songwriter would be happy that someone liked their song well enough to do a cover. I like to listen to covers of songs i like, to see how someone else puts their spin on it. Having said that, there are great , good and even garbage covers out there. And of course that is personal taste. Mona and Lisa do a fantastic job with their covers. That is how i found them. I was looking for covers of Beatle songs.
Keep up the good work Mona and Lisa and the whole team.-
Hi William, a good point. There is no better complement than when the original artist is impressed! Case in point Ray Davies reaches out to MLT to do a cover of Lola to celebrate the 50th anniversary of that song last year. After being referred to MLTs cover of You Really Got Me, and Tired Of Waiting by his girl friend, he was impressed enough to ask MLT to do Lola! And what about John Sebastian, Steve Lukather….etc.
This reminds me also of about artistic interpretation. In Classical music that’s about all there is as renowned artists like Itzhak Perlman, Vladimir Horowitz bring back to life the great masterpieces of 200 years ago or as Bill so eloquently put it “…Mona and Lisa bring it back after 50 years” great rock classics too. A 300 year old Bach piano piece you would think if a competent pianist plays it properly according to how it was written, it will sound as good as any. I use to think that when I first got into classical and bought up all the cheapest CDs by any artist I could find thinking I was building a great music collection. I learned later there is a whole art around INTERPRETATION and bringing across passion and feeling like a true master is extremely rare, and that’s what distinguishes the greats from the rest. When it comes to Bach’s piano, no one compares to Glenn Gould. His Bach interpretation is magic, nuance matters, and I feel more emotion in his interpretation of Bach than anyone else. He truly brings Bach’s 300 year old keyboard pieces to life. Just like MLT bring the Beatles and all the great music of the 60s to life, they have that magic same magic that is incomparable!
Emotions just spill out of his fingers as he makes contact with the keyboard.
Excuse my classical music analogies, I’m sure some here are getting tired of it, but that’s my musical perspective. 🙂
-
Log in to reply.
