From Apologetix, a Christian Band.
Truthfully, I kind of like it......
http://www.myspace.com/apologetix1
and on the right hand side, click on bethlehem rapsody
Thread
Posts in chronological order
LOL. The funniest part when was the galileos sounded like chipmunks. LOL.
Overall, very very lame! Two thumbs down. If you're going to cover a song, at least use the original lyrics.
Overall, very very lame! Two thumbs down. If you're going to cover a song, at least use the original lyrics.
That was...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If you're going to cover a song, at least use the original lyrics.[/QUOTE]
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
It sucked
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If you're going to cover a song, at least use the original lyrics.[/QUOTE]
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
[/QUOTE]
Couldn't agree with that more.
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
[/QUOTE]
Couldn't agree with that more.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If you're going to cover a song, at least use the original lyrics.[/QUOTE]
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
[/QUOTE]
Couldn't agree with that more.[/QUOTE]
I bet you could.
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
[/QUOTE]
Couldn't agree with that more.[/QUOTE]
I bet you could.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If you're going to cover a song, at least use the original lyrics.[/QUOTE]
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed with you, more on the note-for-note part than the word-for-word. It's alright if you change a line here and there, but if you're only using half of the original song (i.e., Madonna's "American Pie"--a terrible cover of a great song, for the record), is it really a cover, or are you just sampling someone else's hit.
The best full cover (i.e., lyrical--I've heard some great instrumental renditions of the song) of BoRhap I've had the pleasure of listening to is the one done by the Flaming Lips. It maintains the original lyrics, but changes the melodies and timing just enough to give it that "wow, cool" effect, and make it a work definitely by the Lips. Compare that to Constantine's cover of the same song, and you can see that maybe Constantine's voice is closer to what tradition dictates the song should sound like, but as it's a straight cover of the song, it inevitably falls on its face.
And then there's the version done by the Braids. Listen, I appreciate experimenting as much as the next guy, but please try not to experiment in such a way that makes me want to put a gun against my head, pull my trigger, bang, I'm dead.
The cover mentioned in this thread, I think, is bad. The talent level of the band is negligible, and they don't have the vocal or instrumental chops to take this song. Beyond that (and primarily, I think) is the subject matter. Changing the dark, mysterious lyrics of BoRhap to fit the biblically simple story of David and Goliath seems trite and insulting. I'd give it a D+ for originality and the fact that they were willing to experiment with the lyrics (and moreover, to even try to cover the most difficult song out there), but it's just a boring and pointless redux clearly aimed at a certain audience. That audience would probably eat their version up, but I find it's more of a "chew it up and spit it out" proposition.
Tell that to Weird Al!
To me, matching the lyrics is optional. A cover is good in my books as long as you try to make it your own song - lyrically, musically, or both. Nothing is more boring than someone lifting a song note for note, word for word.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed with you, more on the note-for-note part than the word-for-word. It's alright if you change a line here and there, but if you're only using half of the original song (i.e., Madonna's "American Pie"--a terrible cover of a great song, for the record), is it really a cover, or are you just sampling someone else's hit.
The best full cover (i.e., lyrical--I've heard some great instrumental renditions of the song) of BoRhap I've had the pleasure of listening to is the one done by the Flaming Lips. It maintains the original lyrics, but changes the melodies and timing just enough to give it that "wow, cool" effect, and make it a work definitely by the Lips. Compare that to Constantine's cover of the same song, and you can see that maybe Constantine's voice is closer to what tradition dictates the song should sound like, but as it's a straight cover of the song, it inevitably falls on its face.
And then there's the version done by the Braids. Listen, I appreciate experimenting as much as the next guy, but please try not to experiment in such a way that makes me want to put a gun against my head, pull my trigger, bang, I'm dead.
The cover mentioned in this thread, I think, is bad. The talent level of the band is negligible, and they don't have the vocal or instrumental chops to take this song. Beyond that (and primarily, I think) is the subject matter. Changing the dark, mysterious lyrics of BoRhap to fit the biblically simple story of David and Goliath seems trite and insulting. I'd give it a D+ for originality and the fact that they were willing to experiment with the lyrics (and moreover, to even try to cover the most difficult song out there), but it's just a boring and pointless redux clearly aimed at a certain audience. That audience would probably eat their version up, but I find it's more of a "chew it up and spit it out" proposition.
Ew. That was stupid. :S