Gotta love it when a cover is better than the original.

[The Stormbringer]

No one posted it? HOLY SHIT, NO ONE POSTED IT?! What the fuck! This is like the ULTIMATE cover > original!

Original:



Cover:



Johnny Cash's version just seems so much more authentic. Sorry, did I say seems? I meant IS. This man went through so much pain in his life, and it all comes out in this song.

[Deleted]

You are aware that Whiskey In The Jar is an Irish folk song right? And Metallica's version is crap.

Metallica's version is a cover of Thin Lizzy's version, and yes, I know it's originally a folk song, but the original folk song is nothing like Thin Lizzy's version. Listen to the version by the Dubliners and you'll hear the difference. And whether Metallica's version is "crap", it's still better than Thin Lizzy's.

No one posted it? HOLY SHIT, NO ONE POSTED IT?! What the fuck! This is like the ULTIMATE cover > original!

Hurt was mentioned like five times.

Personally, I like Reznor's version more, being a fan. I think Cash got a lot of soppy pity points because he was dying and died the next year. And because he was Johnny Cash. I didn't like his version as much because he made it too easygoing and mellow. Also, Cash changed the crown of shit into a crown of thorns. Too religious for me.

[Deleted]

Decent Original


Godly cover

[ItachiZaku]

Yes, it's apparently blasphemy, but I like The Ataris' version of Boys of Summer.

Nope, I like the cover as well.

[Deleted]

Original:

[eschatological]

This cover is better than the orginal
-
-snip-

If we're talking Marilyn Manson, the one that made them famous was better than the original:

Sweet Dreams:

[Mormolyce]

I don't know about better but...

Amazing classic:



Worthy tribute:

[The Stormbringer]

Metallica's version is a cover of Thin Lizzy's version, and yes, I know it's originally a folk song, but the original folk song is nothing like Thin Lizzy's version. Listen to the version by the Dubliners and you'll hear the difference. And whether Metallica's version is "crap", it's still better than Thin Lizzy's.

Hurt was mentioned like five times.

Personally, I like Reznor's version more, being a fan. I think Cash got a lot of soppy pity points because he was dying and died the next year. And because he was Johnny Cash. I didn't like his version as much because he made it too easygoing and mellow. Also, Cash changed the crown of shit into a crown of thorns. Too religious for me.

Mentioned, but no one posted the video of it.

[Wildtree]

I normally don't really enjoy what Disturbed is laying down but they certainly did a good job with

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Dg-g7t2l4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fWyzwo1xg0

I don't like saying one version is better than another though since it's music and to each their own. I'd probably listen to the Disturbed version before the S&G though.

That's indeed a great cover version. Paul Simon likes it too, as far as I know. I personally prefer the original, since it contains the Zeitgeist that needs to be there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdseN1Irbp8

Discuss.

if you insist..
1. the guy who made the video is an idiot.
Under Pressure is a Queen song (album Hot Space) not a Bowie song. He only collaborated with Queen.
And on that note. You must be out of your mind, to declare such a piss poor band like Smash mouth as better than two of the best vocalists in Rock history in a duet.

here's a couple other ones

Original:


Cover:




Original


Cover:

[Sky High]

love this song by Judas Priest. but the updated version by Machinehead is way more badass sounding.

[Fayenoor]

There are very few decent covers. Johnny Cash's Hurt is one.

Heart's "Stariway to Heaven" is another decent cover. It is not the original, but their interpretation is pretty darn good. If you can make Page and Plant cry in live TV while doing a cover of their song, you did a good job IMHO.

[Wildtree]

Metallica's version is a cover of Thin Lizzy's version, and yes, I know it's originally a folk song, but the original folk song is nothing like Thin Lizzy's version. Listen to the version by the Dubliners and you'll hear the difference. And whether Metallica's version is "crap", it's still better than Thin Lizzy's.

No, Metallica's version lost completely what made the Lizzy tune great (and a charts success). It's just a metal shredding melody, while Lizzy merged two styles.
Irish Folk and Rock.
Much like White people can't really rap, American metal dudes can't play European folk rock.

[ro9ue]

Hootie's Hey Hey What Can I Do > Zeppelins

[Orlong]

So listening to radioactive I've decided that the cover that lindsey stirling did with pantatonix is way better than the original by imagine dragons. I always love it when a cover sounds better than the original. I also love when Weird Al's music is better than the original songs he's doing parodies of.

Covers are done by lazy and/or uncreative artists and shouldnt even be taken seriously. If you are a professional musician who makes money from your work, you should be performing original material instead of piggybacking off someone else's blood, sweat, and tears. That said, if youre going to listen to a cover of this song, you should at least listen to a parody and not a note for note, word for word copy.

[Wildtree]

Heart's "Stariway to Heaven" is another decent cover. It is not the original, but their interpretation is pretty darn good. If you can make Page and Plant cry in live TV while doing a cover of their song, you did a good job IMHO.

Little known fact.
Heart started out as a LZ cover band.

- - - Updated - - -

Covers are done by lazy and/or uncreative artists and shouldnt even be taken seriously.

LOL.
once again a topic where you've no clue about but have to throw your hat in the ring.
Why are you always making a fool out of yourself?

[Fayenoor]

Covers are done by lazy and/or uncreative artists and shouldnt even be taken seriously. If you are a professional musician who makes money from your work, you should be performing original material instead of piggybacking off someone else's blood, sweat, and tears.

Many modern artists do not write their own songs and have dedicated song writers. The music is often developed by a creative team behind the scenes (part of the audio label). The singer needs to look pretty, have a decent voice and deliver. That's modern music.

Days of originality and creative genius in music is long dead.

While a lot of artists do sing covers to cover their lack of originality, many more sing covers as a tribute to the original artist. And sometimes you want to interpret a song in a different way and add your spin to it. Case in point -- "Yesterday" by Beatles has been covered by more than 3000 artists including Elvis and Sinatra (both older and senior to the Beatles).

And for some songs, you really sometimes wish -- "Hey, how will this song sound in this dude's voice?"

E.g. Ray Charles cover of Lennon's Imagine.

[Soulwind]

if you insist..
1. the guy who made the video is an idiot.
Under Pressure is a Queen song (album Hot Space) not a Bowie song. He only collaborated with Queen.
And on that note. You must be out of your mind, to declare such a piss poor band like Smash mouth as better than two of the best vocalists in Rock history in a duet.

I knew someone would take it seriously. Thank you.

[Deleted]

I'll just leave this here
[a very BAD under the bridge cover]

no...

[bad under pressure cover]Discuss.

no....

[WORST "the sound of silence" cover man ever thought possible]I don't like saying one version is better than another though since it's music and to each their own. I'd probably listen to the Disturbed version before the S&G though.

hell no...nothing beats that original....
its sad if people are so desperate to stay on the horizon that they have to cover songs instead of comin up with new ones and ruin them like this one...

Areosmith - Dream On[bad dream on cover]

no...

[bad Metallica covers]

no, just no. Kill'em all and Master of the Puppets are songs you should not cover...

Boyz in the Hood:

No....

[Laerrus]

No one posted it? HOLY SHIT, NO ONE POSTED IT?! What the fuck! This is like the ULTIMATE cover > original!

Johnny Cash's version just seems so much more authentic. Sorry, did I say seems? I meant IS. This man went through so much pain in his life, and it all comes out in this song.

Was thinking the same thing until I found your post. Agreed, Cash really took Hurt to a whole new level.

Here is another cover that I like better than the original.

Cover:



Original:

[Wildtree]

Many modern artists do not write their own songs and have dedicated song writers. The music is often developed by a creative team behind the scenes (part of the audio label). The singer needs to look pretty, have a decent voice and deliver. That's modern music.

Days of originality and creative genius in music is long dead.

While a lot of artists do sing covers to cover their lack of originality, many more sing covers as a tribute to the original artist. And sometimes you want to interpret a song in a different way and add your spin to it. Case in point -- "Yesterday" by Beatles has been covered by more than 3000 artists including Elvis and Sinatra (both older and senior to the Beatles).

And for some songs, you really sometimes wish -- "Hey, how will this song sound in this dude's voice?"

E.g. Ray Charles cover of Lennon's Imagine.

or Roxy Music




On that note...

David Bowie has a whole album of cover versions - Pin Ups

Since we talking about better covers...
Deep Purple put themselves on the map with those two covers



And Hendrix' too got famous with a cover: Hey Joe.

Great artists can take a song and make it their own. Bad artists just play it.