|
|
Blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
posted April 05, 2020 11:44 AM |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT9dQoffs9k
Trance 02/2020
|
|
AlexSpl
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 05, 2020 12:26 PM |
|
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted April 07, 2020 03:29 PM |
|
|
The Kelly Family - Fell In Love With An Alien
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted April 09, 2020 12:34 PM |
|
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted April 09, 2020 02:34 PM |
|
|
The Monkees - Daydream Believer
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted April 18, 2020 03:10 PM |
|
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 28, 2020 05:15 AM |
|
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 30, 2020 08:10 AM |
|
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 30, 2020 08:14 AM |
|
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 04:26 AM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
Pointless.
Nice family pastime, though. 
Heheh. It’s quite a good cover, you just dont get the actual blues after all that distortion distorted your hearing.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 09:32 AM |
|
|
No, I don't think it's a "good" cover.
It's a pointless cover as I said. It adds nothing to the original, it just takes things away (the haunting harmonica and the echoed hammerblow drumbeat). The guitar part is actually very easy (if you know what goes on, it's just an open guitar tuning). The genius is in composing and arranging something so very easy in the core to that effect.
The song is so good, that even with the key elements missing it still sounds good, so it's a good piece to do for such an opportunity. But it's not a "cover" in a real sense. It's playing a song and having fun.
The original isn't in any way distorted, mind. The overall sound is just matching the lyrical event.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 09:59 AM |
|
|
First of all, “the original” is this.
Although, you are right to think this version is derived from the Zeppelin cover, with the same signature riff and all. However, it is not a blues rock cover like the Zeppelin one but rather a “back to roots” acoustic cover, except maybe the vocal which is quite untraditional and sad in a haunting way as well. It would be senseless to suggest it is missing this and that from the Zeppelin version, since it has a completely different feel to it. By your logic, all unplugged covers are pointless and missing elements of the electric versions. Personally, as the years went by, I started to prefer acoustic music to electric music more and more, the nuances, the slides, the echoes feel much more subtle. Just listen to a typical electric bass solo and a contrabass solo and you’ll hear what I mean.
All of this beside, the Zeppelin cover is a classic and I’ve heard it a zillion times by now, I’m used to it, it’s kind of like a dead metaphor or listening to Yesterday at this point where as this version is fresh and quite a nice suprise since they are not pro’s.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 12:02 PM |
|
|
No, it's not the ORIGINAL.
When the Levee Breaks is a song by Memphis Minnie and Kansas Joe McCoy.
Led Zeppelin's version is a song by Led Zeppelin and Memphis Minnie (and NOT Kansas Joe McCoy) which caters for the fact that most of Memphis Minnie's lyrics went into Zep's version, but the music is completely different.
For all intents and purposes it's two different songs that share a significant part of the lyrics. The Led Zeppelin song isn't a cover. (A cover is usually the same song with more or less different arrangement - say, Hendrix and Dylan's Watchtower or Harrison's and Bassey's Something.)
Your other point is completely moot, because the harmonica is an unplugged instrument. So it's an UNPLUGGED element that is first and foremost missing, and if you look at my post back, I said that it's haunting, and you write that it's the VOICE that it's sad and haunting. That amounts to "pointless" - they are just missing a harmonica player.
The massiveness of the Zep version isn't the result of it being plugged-in or something like that. They are plugged in as well, they just use accoustic instruments exclusively - but that doesn't make that much of a difference Keith Richards played Jumpin Jack Flash with an accoustic guitar plugged into a battery wireless (which was my first "amplifier" as well).
The bottom line is they play a cover version of Led Zep's When the Levee Breaks, and while it's a good rendition it doesn't bring anything new into the equation - the main element is that the harmonica is missing. It's like someone playing All Along the Watchtower Hendrix like, but without lead guitar. Or Blowin in the wind, Dylan-like, but without harmonica.
Which means, for me it's pointless. I'll always prefer the original they cover.
Although they will have had fun doing it, and I have no problem with that. Homemade music is fine. I do it as well. Just because I work the guitar and play When the Levee Breaks I STILL prefer listening to the original, although I have a lot of fun playing.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 12:27 PM |
|
|
1- Led Zeppelin version is a modification, not a brand new song. It’s not just the lyrics they use, they extract a partition from the 12-bar structure and use it adding a riff of their own. It is a creative cover but a cover nevertheless. Led Zeppelin does that a lot, another perfect example that comes to mind is How Many More Times. They had even been sued for copyright violation regarding changing the credits and settled. What they do is a very common thing in blues music as long as you dont mess with the credits.
2- The harp in the LZ version is not acoustic harp, it’s electric harp in the style of Chicago Blues, Little Walter, Billy Branch etc. But that is beside the point because the end result is electric blues, not acoustic. Electric blues can have acoustic elements, the drum is always acoustic for instance, doesnt make it acoustic blues.
3- The harp isnt “missing.” They just dont use harp in this version and the slide guitar fills in for the same resonance. There isnt a rule that suggests the song should always be covered with harp. The end result is different of course, but that is the point. Keep in mind Hendrix played All Along The Watchtower without the harmonica where as the original had harmonica. Would you call it missing?
4- Well, feel free to share your own homemade version then. If it’s any good I’ll listen to that, too. Which is the only point we need in this regard.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 01:10 PM |
|
|
1) You are wrong. Case in point: Bring it on Home off of Led Zep II. That song is fully credited to Willie Dixon, although the middle is musically significantly different.
Not so for this song, where the music has nothing to do with the "original" at all. It's therefore NOT a cover, and that is in keeping with the credits of the song.
2) The harp is electric only in the sense that the sound is picked up by a micro and then goes through an amp. The instruments played by the family (including the voice) are "electric" in the same way. So they are all either plugged-in in some way or unplugged. (The harmonica isn't plugged in.)
3) You miss the point. They play the song like Led Zep does - it's just that some important parts of the song are missing. Hendrix doesn'T use the harmonica, but INSTEAD uses his guitar (and studio technique) to also ADD something (apart from altering the tempo and some other things, resulting in a song SOUNDING completely different). With your family's version, you could simply put in harmonica and a real drum kit and the song would sound even more like the original. They are just 4 familiy guys who give a solid rendition of a song, but can't play one of the instruments involved (the singer could do it; Zepparella shows it).
Again, it's not bad, but it's missing the whole point of the song. The song itself is pretty simple (it sounds so great due to the open tuning of the guitar - you won't get that sound with a regularly tuned guitar), and the play (of bass and guitar and even drums) isn't difficult. If it's a good song (riff) this is enough (the Stones made a career of it), and that the version sounds good is just document of how good a composition it is. But it misses what makes it truly SPECIAL, the heavy drum sound and the haunting harmonica.
The song misses the point. Without it, it's still a good song, but not as good as the original. Special songs like that are difficult to "cover", since it's difficult to find a new angle.
4) I certainly won't waste anyone's time with that, since I just try to play the song and enjoy it.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 01:56 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 13:59, 01 May 2020.
|
1- No, I’m not. First of all, I myself directly hear the part they extracted, so claiming “the music has nothing to do with the original at all” seems absurd to me. If you listen to enough blues originals from pre-rock era, you’ll hear it too. Blues has a pretty simple structure anyway and although a few modifications can make the song appear very different at first, it is not. They go way beyond that in jazz but the credits, “the song remains the same.” (Couldn’t resist the pun.) Don’t take my word for it, wiki the song if you like. There arent two separate articles, are there, it is one song and the article refers to the Led Zeppelin VERSION. Check what they did to Robert Johnson's Travelin' Riverside Blues, for instance, it sounds like another song but it isnt and the credits still say it is a Johnson song. I can hear that,too.
2- That's just playing with semantics. When you amplify your voice through a mic, it's not called "electric vocal." But just like electric guitar or piano or violin, there is an actual thing called the electric harp and the sound is significantly different than acoustic harmonica. You don't use the amplifier just to amplify its sound like in an ancient theatre. It is electrified:
Acoustic harp
Electric harp
Electric blues:
Electric blues refers to any type of blues music distinguished by the use of electric amplification for musical instruments. The guitar was the first instrument to be popularly amplified and used by early pioneers T-Bone Walker in the late 1930s and John Lee Hooker and Muddy Waters in the 1940s. Their styles developed into West Coast blues, Detroit blues, and post-World War II Chicago blues, which differed from earlier, predominantly acoustic-style blues. By the early 1950s, Little Walter was a featured soloist on blues harmonica or blues harp using a small hand-held microphone fed into a guitar amplifier. Although it took a little longer, the electric bass guitar gradually replaced the stand-up bass by the early 1960s. Electric organs and especially keyboards later became widely used in electric blues.
3- This is just a fancy way of saying "I dont like this cover." I do, they grasp what is essential in the song and to me it is not necesseraly the blues harp.I am very much used to that style of blues harp playing, tons of Chicago Blues songs in the fifties use the exact same echoing, Mudy Waters for instance. (Again, Little Walter was his regular harp player, then James Cotton after he died.) I mean, I also like the LZ version very much but the "haunting" harp doesn't sound as extraordinary or irreplaceble to me as it sounds to you. I'm very used to it.
And saying it is not as good as the LZ version is one thing, and to repeat myself, I heard the LZ version a zillion times anyway, saying it is pointless is another. The LZ version is a classic anyway, but it is a good cover and I always have a soft spot for acoustic versions anyway.
4- Okie dookie.
P.S. Last but not least: Click
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 03:51 PM |
|
|
1) Yes, you are. The song is credited as I said. Covers are not credited as writers. Jimi Hendricx isn't credited as a writer of All Along the Watchtower. It's Bob Dylan, period. When the Levee Breaks, Led Zeppelin are credited. Therefore it's no cover, whether you like that or not.
It's no cover, no discussion,
2) The Electric Harp is this.
There are no ELECTRIC harmonicas in the sense that you can plug a harmonica into something (as you canot plug in a Saxophone). The way this is done is via amp and microphone (and you can use all kinds of in-between stuff to change the sound). That's what I discribed in the first place. You don't have to repeat it.
Functionally there is no difference between a harmonica and a voice. You can just sing and you can play a harmonica (use your air not for voice but for instrument), and you can put both through a mic and the mike through any kind of amplifier and additional effects.
Whether one is called differently than the other, and dismissing what it actually is, THAT is actually semantics.
3) The number of times you have personally listened to a song is irrelevant for the quality of the song. It doesn't change the original one bit and it also doesn't make the cover better. I won't repeat myself why it's not a good cover. If you like it, fine, but it's kind of like James Last playing Rock Classics, if you know what I mean. Easy listening.
P.S.: Irrelevant.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 05:59 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 18:00, 01 May 2020.
|
JJ you are so stubborn, sometimes it is like talking to a rock.
1- There is only one song called “When The Levee Breaks,” not two different songs. I used the word “modified”, wiki uses the word “re-worked,” same difference. LZ re-worked that one single song. So the original remains the same. When Liszt transcripts Paganini’s La Campanella to piano, it is indicated in the credits, yet, the piece is still Paganini’s La Campanella, not Liszt’s original La Campanella.
There are versions of many blues classics that are modified same as When The Levee Breaks. Back Door Man by The Doors or Love in Vain by The Rolling Stones also have additional riffs, new approach etc. Just because members of Led Zeppelin were very eager to take credit for the songs they didn’t create from scratch, doesn’t change the situation. It is the original song that they are re-working, not some brand new thing. They make great covers but that being said, they are also infamous for taking credit when they shouldn’t:
Plenty of other bands in the 1960s played fast and loose with their songwriting credits, figuring they wouldn’t get caught: The Rolling Stones recorded “Love in Vain” but didn’t credit Robert Johnson as the song’s author. The Beatles swiped elements from musicians ranging from Chuck Berry to Pee Wee Crayton, but were usually careful to disguise the source. Led Zeppelin, however, took the practice further than most of their peers.
Part of the band’s collective genius was that they could quote a favorite old song, and then adrenalize it and turn it into something new. John Bonham, for example, transformed the drum beat from Little Richard’s “Keep a Knockin'” into the motor behind “Rock & Roll.” For better and worse, beats aren’t protected by copyright, while melodies and lyrics are – which is why so many songwriters have sued the band. As with most aspects of their career, Led Zeppelin seemed to operate on the principle that it was better to ask for forgiveness than permission. Source
2- No. The electric harp as in “harmonica” is not “that”. Whether you directly plug it to an amp or not is not what determines the difference. (And nowadays that is also a method of getting the electrified sound.) I played blues harmonica myself, and on stage too. Playing acoustic harmonica to a mic and using the amplifier as an electrifying effect are two different things. Traditional, acoustic harmonica and Chicago Blues style electric harmonica are two separate styles. No blues listener will label the harmonica on LZ’s When The Levee Breaks as “acoustic.” That is not the terminology and just because you are ignorant of the terminology and try to work around your way through that ignorance desperately doesn’t change a thing: https://www.harpamps.com/
3- Wrong again. Have you seen the movie Leon? Generally speaking, the acoustic versions are “the knife.” They have much more subtle nuance but that was not the argument anyway. The argument was that the LZ version is already there and had these players copied it using the harmonica like you suggest, it would only be a pale imitation, where as this was a fresh approach, something with a different feel. But I don't think you can hear those nuances anyway, hence you call it easy listening. Too much punk will do that to your ears.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 06:32 PM |
|
|
You are just picking things the way you like.
1) Again - it's not a cover. The song is credited NOT to the writers of the original song, but to one of them AND Led Zeppelin. Hence, it's two DIFFERENT songs, one is by Kansas Joe and Memphies Minnie, the other by Memphis Minnie and LZ.
Love in Vain is a song written by Robert Johnson and was covered by the Rolling Stones. The fact that it is significantly different than the original (and well done) makes it quite it a good cover (which is what makes the cover in question not so good).
Your quote is irrelevant. The questionable stuff is lyrics, not music (which is said in your quoted source as well). In the case of THIS song all is as it should be.
That's just the way it is, argue or not.
2) You also play semantics with what is CALLED electric, but you completely ignore what IS electric and acoustic. The meaning has somewhat changed insofar that amplification just to make things louder so that you can hear it is still called "unplugged" (or acoustic), while if an effect is used, be it via the amp (compression, say) or effect tools it's electric. (If you play something through a mic the signal MUST go through an amp, the only question is whether you do it "clean" or not.) I don't think that anyone is singing through a mic without using at least some reverb, so strictly speaking that's not "plain singing". Same with the harmonica. Additionally, when you make a record you can change the recorded stuff in the mixing process yet again.
In the end it's a question of the SOUND that you GET, and it seems to me that you understand the sound of the LZ version differently than me, because it's not really ELECTRIC sounding (in the effect sense). A plugged-in Wstern guitar doesn't sound that different than an electric guitar with no gain and clean signal. The heavy (it's actually massive, not heavy in the sense the word is usually used) sound is'n the result of an amplifier electric effect.
3) Now you are getting ridiculous.
If Rick Beato would make a what makes this song great about the song, I bet with you, that he'd place a lot of emphasis on the drums, the harmonica and the guitar tuning. The punk are you with your "back to the roots" pretentiousness.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted May 01, 2020 06:48 PM |
|
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
