This week I will be comparing "With or Without You" by U2 and the cover done by Allred.
Musicality
The original by U2 is much softer and has a much slower pace and the vocals work better with the instruments and tone to really evoke powerful emotions. The version by Allred is done with an acoustic guitar, it has a faster pace and they make the song sound much more modern with their vocals and the use of their instruments. The song was originally released in 1987 so of course the original song has more of an 80s feel to it. However, I personally feel like the original is much more timeless and I still love it as much now as I did as a kid.
Lyrics
The lyrics are basically the same except that Allred incorporated the chorus from "Shadow of the Day" by Linkin Park closer to the end of their version. I'm not the biggest fan of mashups, I don't understand why some bands feel the need to do covers and mash two different songs together. Sometimes it sounds good sometimes not so much. However in this case it does work for Allred, I do like the original song by Linkin Park as well.
This song in general consists of very powerful lyrics. One of the stanzas that really stands out is: "Sleight of hand and twist of fate/ On a bed of nails she makes me wait/ And I wait without you." I always thought that was the first stanza in the song. But after looking at the lyrics it's actually the second stanza. I'm actually surprised I never noticed that before.
Another stanza that stands out to me is: "Through the storm we reach the shore/ You give it all but I want more/ And I'm waiting for you." I especially like the use of second person narrative in this song. It's as if the singer is referring specifically to the listener.
The song itself and the lyrics are pretty straightforward. He seems to be singing about not being able to live without the person he loves and that he's willing to endure anything and everything just to be with them. The stanza that seems to signify this is: "My hands are tied/ My body bruised, she's got me with/ Nothing to win and/ Nothing left to lose." Either he likes it kinky and rough or he's singing about how much he probably went through and the obstacles he faced to be with them. This specific stanza isn't really clear but I like to think of it as him saying that he would do anything.
The stanzas that Allred added from "Shadow of the Day" are: "And the sun will set for you/ The sun will set for you." "And the shadow of the day/ Will embrace the world in grey." "And the sun will set for you." These three different stanzas are the chorus of the original Linkin Park song. These lyrics give the song a bit of a more depressing feel. The song itself is a bit depressing, but the instruments in the original and even in the cover make you forget how depressing the song actually is. I'm not sure how relevant the additional lyrics are to the song as a whole. However, they made it work by choosing lyrics that also happen to use the second person perspective as well.
I think both versions are good, but I still prefer the original to the cover. I didn't even realize that there was a cover done on this song. I'm impressed that Allred managed to make it sound more modern without changing the lyrics. Instead all they did was add a set of lyrics at the very end of the song. The additional lyrics caught me off guard. I don't think they really needed additional lyrics and I'm still confused as to why they felt the need to do that. Other than that I don't see anything wrong with the cover.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Splitting at the seams of now
This week I will be comparing "No One's Gonna Love You" by Band of Horses and covered by Cee Lo Green.
Musicality
The original has a bit of a slow feel to it, they sing it more softly. The instruments do a good job of making the pace of the song sound much faster. Cee Lo Green's version sounds more sensual than the original. His deep and more baritone voice gives it a different sound altogether. Cee Lo Green is more of a rapper while Band of Horses is more of a Southern rock band. The versions don't sound too different, Green's version sounds faster with the tempo and pace as well as his strong and powerful voice. The original has a slower pace compared to Green's version.
Lyrics
The lyrics of both versions are still relatively the same. The title of the song seems to say it all. The singer/song writer is talking about how much they love someone and that they would do anything for them. The best lyric that exemplifies that is: "And anything to make you smile/ It is my better side of you to admire." The singer seems to be saying that they want this person to only focus on the good things and not on the bad things.
The first stanza really stood out to me: "It's looking like a limb torn off/ Or altogether just taken apart/ We're reeling through an endless fall/ We are the ever-living ghost of what once was." The singer seems to be saying that their relationship has taken on a different level. Maybe he's saying that their relationship isn't the same as it used to be and he misses what it was like before. It seems very jarring compared to the title of the song. The singer states that no one will love this person the same way that they do, but the "it" in the beginning sounds like it's referring to the same love. So this "love" looks "like a limb torn off" that's a very gruesome way to put it.
Another lyric that stands out to me and gets repeated is: "When things start splitting at the seams of now/ The whole thing's tumbling down." I'm assuming that the "things" the song is referring to is the relationship between the singer and the person he's singing to. Their whole relationship is falling apart because it's just not the same as it used to be. Their relationship is now "the ever-living ghost of what once was" and it can't go back to the way that it used to be.
The instruments in both versions give a very upbeat and happy tone. Closer inspection of the lyrics show that this song is not has happy as it may seem. The singer goes on to say: "I never want to hear you say/ That you'd be better off/ Or you liked it that way." This lyric is referring back the line "the ever-living ghost of what once was." The singer doesn't want to go back to their past relationship, or maybe he likes her better now that she's changed from who she once was.
Overall, both versions are good. I can't really choose between the two because I like them both equally for different reasons. The versions don't even sound all that different, even the instruments sounded very much the same. It's just the vocals that are different, but even the lyrics stayed the same.
Musicality
The original has a bit of a slow feel to it, they sing it more softly. The instruments do a good job of making the pace of the song sound much faster. Cee Lo Green's version sounds more sensual than the original. His deep and more baritone voice gives it a different sound altogether. Cee Lo Green is more of a rapper while Band of Horses is more of a Southern rock band. The versions don't sound too different, Green's version sounds faster with the tempo and pace as well as his strong and powerful voice. The original has a slower pace compared to Green's version.
Lyrics
The lyrics of both versions are still relatively the same. The title of the song seems to say it all. The singer/song writer is talking about how much they love someone and that they would do anything for them. The best lyric that exemplifies that is: "And anything to make you smile/ It is my better side of you to admire." The singer seems to be saying that they want this person to only focus on the good things and not on the bad things.
The first stanza really stood out to me: "It's looking like a limb torn off/ Or altogether just taken apart/ We're reeling through an endless fall/ We are the ever-living ghost of what once was." The singer seems to be saying that their relationship has taken on a different level. Maybe he's saying that their relationship isn't the same as it used to be and he misses what it was like before. It seems very jarring compared to the title of the song. The singer states that no one will love this person the same way that they do, but the "it" in the beginning sounds like it's referring to the same love. So this "love" looks "like a limb torn off" that's a very gruesome way to put it.
Another lyric that stands out to me and gets repeated is: "When things start splitting at the seams of now/ The whole thing's tumbling down." I'm assuming that the "things" the song is referring to is the relationship between the singer and the person he's singing to. Their whole relationship is falling apart because it's just not the same as it used to be. Their relationship is now "the ever-living ghost of what once was" and it can't go back to the way that it used to be.
The instruments in both versions give a very upbeat and happy tone. Closer inspection of the lyrics show that this song is not has happy as it may seem. The singer goes on to say: "I never want to hear you say/ That you'd be better off/ Or you liked it that way." This lyric is referring back the line "the ever-living ghost of what once was." The singer doesn't want to go back to their past relationship, or maybe he likes her better now that she's changed from who she once was.
Overall, both versions are good. I can't really choose between the two because I like them both equally for different reasons. The versions don't even sound all that different, even the instruments sounded very much the same. It's just the vocals that are different, but even the lyrics stayed the same.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Strumming my pain with his fingers
This week I will be comparing "Killing me softly with his song" by Lori Lieberman and the cover done by The Fugees.
Musicality
I assumed the original was by Roberta Flack, but after researching more so about the origins of the song I realized that I was wrong. The original by Lori Lieberman is much softer and more soothing. The Fugees have a better tempo and emphasize more on their lyrics. Lieberman's version is played more so with a guitar. The Fugees' version is played more so with drums in the background. Lieberman's version sounds more like a lullaby with the sound of the guitar and her soothing vocals to back her up. Lieberman's version has a bit of a country feel with the singing whereas The Fugees' version has more of a hip hop feel.
Lyrics
There isn't much of a difference between the two songs as a whole. The Fugees switched some of their lyrics around, I believe they were going off of Roberta Flack's version rather than the original. Their first stanza is "Strumming my pain with his fingers/ Singing my life with his words/ Killing me softly with his song/ Killing me softly with his song/ Telling my whole life with his words/ Killing me softly with his song." In Lori Lieberman's version that is the second stanza not the first.
There are a few more stanzas in the original song than in the cover. I'm not quite sure what the song is trying to say. The most powerful line is the title of the song itself. I believe the song is trying to talk about how some songs just touch people and remind them of their own life. Especially the lines: "I felt he found my letters/ And read each one out loud." The only other difference between the two different versions is the title of the song itself. The original is called "Killing me softly with his song" whereas the cover is called "Killing me softly."
One of the stanzas in the original that is not a part of the cover is: "He sang as if he knew me/ In all my dark despair/ And then he looked right through me/ As if I wasn't there/ But he was there, this stranger/ Singing clear and strong." This stanza does seem more like a reiteration of one of the other stanzas. These lyrics are a bit more powerful though with words like "dark despair" and "looked right through me." This stanza is just as powerful and suggestive of depression as the words that are repeated in both versions "Killing me softly with his song."
Overall I prefer the cover over the original because I'm not a very big fan of country. The original has too much of a country feel for my liking. I'm much more familiar with The Fugees' version and Roberta Flack's version than I am with the original. I'm actually really shocked that the original is done by a Caucasian woman, because I'm so used to thinking of it as a song sung by an African American. It was hard for me to imagine anyone else singing it aside from those versions.
Musicality
I assumed the original was by Roberta Flack, but after researching more so about the origins of the song I realized that I was wrong. The original by Lori Lieberman is much softer and more soothing. The Fugees have a better tempo and emphasize more on their lyrics. Lieberman's version is played more so with a guitar. The Fugees' version is played more so with drums in the background. Lieberman's version sounds more like a lullaby with the sound of the guitar and her soothing vocals to back her up. Lieberman's version has a bit of a country feel with the singing whereas The Fugees' version has more of a hip hop feel.
Lyrics
There isn't much of a difference between the two songs as a whole. The Fugees switched some of their lyrics around, I believe they were going off of Roberta Flack's version rather than the original. Their first stanza is "Strumming my pain with his fingers/ Singing my life with his words/ Killing me softly with his song/ Killing me softly with his song/ Telling my whole life with his words/ Killing me softly with his song." In Lori Lieberman's version that is the second stanza not the first.
There are a few more stanzas in the original song than in the cover. I'm not quite sure what the song is trying to say. The most powerful line is the title of the song itself. I believe the song is trying to talk about how some songs just touch people and remind them of their own life. Especially the lines: "I felt he found my letters/ And read each one out loud." The only other difference between the two different versions is the title of the song itself. The original is called "Killing me softly with his song" whereas the cover is called "Killing me softly."
One of the stanzas in the original that is not a part of the cover is: "He sang as if he knew me/ In all my dark despair/ And then he looked right through me/ As if I wasn't there/ But he was there, this stranger/ Singing clear and strong." This stanza does seem more like a reiteration of one of the other stanzas. These lyrics are a bit more powerful though with words like "dark despair" and "looked right through me." This stanza is just as powerful and suggestive of depression as the words that are repeated in both versions "Killing me softly with his song."
Overall I prefer the cover over the original because I'm not a very big fan of country. The original has too much of a country feel for my liking. I'm much more familiar with The Fugees' version and Roberta Flack's version than I am with the original. I'm actually really shocked that the original is done by a Caucasian woman, because I'm so used to thinking of it as a song sung by an African American. It was hard for me to imagine anyone else singing it aside from those versions.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Glaciers have melted to the sea
This week I will be comparing "Crystalised" by The XX and the cover done by Gorillaz.
Musicality
The XX are more of an indie pop band whereas Gorillaz is more of a mixture of techno, alternative, rock and hip hop. The original is mainly played with electric guitars, bass, drums, a keyboard or a synthesizer. The cover done by Gorillaz seems to include a xylophone and a piano. The original sounds a bit slow in the vocals, but the instruments keep the tempo and pace making it sound faster than it is and the songs seems to sound more like a duet with the guy singing one line and the girl singing every other line. The cover somehow manages to make the song sound even slower than the original. The instruments don't help as much in the cover, the vocals are slow and soft as are the instruments. The slow vocals in both the original and cover make some of the lyrics hard to understand. The cover however is harder to understand because the tempo and pace of the instruments and the vocals.
Lyrics
There's no difference between each of the lyrics. I'm not quite sure what the song is talking about, the lyrics are a bit jumbled. At times it seems the song is talking about a bad relationship and a few lyrics sound like they're talking about drugs. The stanza that best exemplifies this confusion is this one: "Things have gotten closer to the sun/ And I've done things in small doses/ So don't think that I'm pushing you away/ When you're the one that I've kept closest." The first half sounds like it may be talking about drugs especially the part about "small doses." The second half sounds like a bad relationship.
Both versions sound a bit depressing. The cover manages to sound even more depressing simply because it has a slower tempo and softer vocals. The stanza that best exemplifies the feel of sadness is: "Glaciers have melted to the sea/ I wish the tide would take me over/ I've been down on my knees/ And you just keep on getting closer." At first I thought the "you" in the last lyric was referring to the person the singer has a bad relationship with. Now I believe that the "you" may be referring to the "tide" the song refers to in the first half of the stanza. It sounds like the singer is waiting for their demise. Another stanza that is really depressing is: "You say I'm foolish/ For pushing this aside/ But burn down our home/ I won't leave alive." This also seems to back up the claim that the singer is expecting to be killed.
The title of the song itself sounds strange "Crystalised" the song title seems to suggest drugs. I usually pair the word crystal with the drug meth. The XX's titled their song with the letter 'S' or "Crystalised" while Gorillaz titled their version with the letter 'Z' or "Crystalized" which I find interesting. The cover done by Gorillaz didn't change any of the original lyrics but they changed the title of their version. I don't understand why they felt the need to distinguish between the two titles.
I personally prefer the original because the cover sounds so much more depressing and too slow for my taste. The original keeps a good tempo and pace coupled with the lyrics which I find very intriguing. I guess it is kind of weird that I prefer the original because I only know this one song by The XX whereas I've heard plenty of songs by Gorillaz that I love.
Musicality
The XX are more of an indie pop band whereas Gorillaz is more of a mixture of techno, alternative, rock and hip hop. The original is mainly played with electric guitars, bass, drums, a keyboard or a synthesizer. The cover done by Gorillaz seems to include a xylophone and a piano. The original sounds a bit slow in the vocals, but the instruments keep the tempo and pace making it sound faster than it is and the songs seems to sound more like a duet with the guy singing one line and the girl singing every other line. The cover somehow manages to make the song sound even slower than the original. The instruments don't help as much in the cover, the vocals are slow and soft as are the instruments. The slow vocals in both the original and cover make some of the lyrics hard to understand. The cover however is harder to understand because the tempo and pace of the instruments and the vocals.
Lyrics
There's no difference between each of the lyrics. I'm not quite sure what the song is talking about, the lyrics are a bit jumbled. At times it seems the song is talking about a bad relationship and a few lyrics sound like they're talking about drugs. The stanza that best exemplifies this confusion is this one: "Things have gotten closer to the sun/ And I've done things in small doses/ So don't think that I'm pushing you away/ When you're the one that I've kept closest." The first half sounds like it may be talking about drugs especially the part about "small doses." The second half sounds like a bad relationship.
Both versions sound a bit depressing. The cover manages to sound even more depressing simply because it has a slower tempo and softer vocals. The stanza that best exemplifies the feel of sadness is: "Glaciers have melted to the sea/ I wish the tide would take me over/ I've been down on my knees/ And you just keep on getting closer." At first I thought the "you" in the last lyric was referring to the person the singer has a bad relationship with. Now I believe that the "you" may be referring to the "tide" the song refers to in the first half of the stanza. It sounds like the singer is waiting for their demise. Another stanza that is really depressing is: "You say I'm foolish/ For pushing this aside/ But burn down our home/ I won't leave alive." This also seems to back up the claim that the singer is expecting to be killed.
The title of the song itself sounds strange "Crystalised" the song title seems to suggest drugs. I usually pair the word crystal with the drug meth. The XX's titled their song with the letter 'S' or "Crystalised" while Gorillaz titled their version with the letter 'Z' or "Crystalized" which I find interesting. The cover done by Gorillaz didn't change any of the original lyrics but they changed the title of their version. I don't understand why they felt the need to distinguish between the two titles.
I personally prefer the original because the cover sounds so much more depressing and too slow for my taste. The original keeps a good tempo and pace coupled with the lyrics which I find very intriguing. I guess it is kind of weird that I prefer the original because I only know this one song by The XX whereas I've heard plenty of songs by Gorillaz that I love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)