Can’t seem to find any guides on cover versions… a search of the docs for “cover” ends up mainly pulling in cover art stuff. Basic issue: if an artist writes/co-writes a song for one band, then plays it later for a different band/solo - is it a cover version?
I’ve been adding some albums by “Peter Hook & The Light” - who are, for the uninitiated, a vehicle for the ex-Joy Division and New Order bassist to play the songs he co-wrote when in those bands. Setting them as cover versions seems slightly odd to me, as he’s playing songs he wrote. In comparison, Paul McCartney has several Beatles tracks on his live albums, and they aren’t flagged as covers.
Another to ponder are the songs Lemmy wrote in Hawkwind, Motörhead and Lost Johnny. Both were later recorded by Motörhead (the band). And Lost Johnny was also recorded by co-writer Mick Farren with his band The Deviants. Currently, they’re sometimes flagged as covers and sometimes not.
This seems like a problem area on every music DB I’ve been on. Setlist.fm has a separate attribute for this (although it’s poorly implemented) that marks the performance as by an author (or co-author) but not by the band that originally recorded it. They just use @Song instead of @Cover, but I think we could come up with better terminology.
[quote=“chiark, post:4, topic:167953”]
Presumably though, there was an initial reason for adding the cover flag?[/quote]
Because it’s interesting/useful information for users? Or am I missing something.
That’s correct, it is interesting to me.
I like to see the percentage of original works / cover works in an album.
And if I like a work, I like to be able to trace down its original performer and to distinguish them from the cover performers.
I agree, and I don’t even think they’re really edge cases. A live recording of a song by a former band member is really common, and some versions straddle the line between a cover and a parody (which warrants a separate work). What if it’s a performance of a standard, traditional or Classical work – do we still want it marked as a cover? It’s never a bad thing to seek out more clarification.
@chiark if an artist composes a song that then is performed by his current band, in later versions/releases when the artist performs the song solo or with another band, the credits for the artist/composer indeed should be “composer” and not “cover”. Therefore, the settings for Paul McCartney are right
In my opinion, to reach what have been reached for Paul McCartney, you could give credits like this:
At the first release of the artist’s own composed song, played with a band, you probably best could credit the composer-artist as the “artist” and the band as supporting artist and when you do that, the “work” (composition) will be added to that particular artist’s “works”. Because, when you mention the band as the artist and as an attribute give credits to the particular artist as composer, the song won’t show up at the artist-composer’s works, it will even not show up at his “relationships” only the band will show up, and then clicking on the band who performed it, the band is mentioned as the artist which is not right at all.
At a second release when the particular composer-artist goes solo or with another band, when having done what I said at 1. nothing odd will happen, the work stays credited as original work by that particular artist! and you only have to link the new recording to the original work!
I hope I could explain what I wanted to explain! It always is difficult explaining in English while not my native language, at least I hope this helps you!
A Work originally written and sung by the Beatles.
It was then “covered” as a Charity Single by a “group” of musicians.
Then a third group creates a Parody version of the Charity Cover version.
Can’t see any way to link the parody to the charity cover version. Can only get a “parody” link to a Work and not the Cover Recording.
If the style of the parody more closely matches the cover than the original. For example, The Beatles’ original “With a Little Help from My Friends”(1) is dramatically different from Joe Cocker’s version(2). John Belushi parodied Cocker’s rendition(3); this is clearly a parody of the cover, and not the original.
The one I am asking about quite easy to spot due to the lyrics on the parody version.
The “charity” version borrowed the Beatles original. Think it was sung close to the original words, just each artist swapping around to sing a line each. That kinda thing.
And then the parody version rips into the organisation behind the charity. And the motive of the people singing on the charity record. Massively changing the words and meaning. NO question about what their target is. Their target is not Lennon and McCartney, but the people cashing in on a disaster.
I can post links here - including YouTube if you want, but I’ll get accused of going OT again. This is also old 1980s UK specific so will need a bit of UK knowledge.
If the only link is between the Parody and the Original it doesn’t make sense. The link needs to be the Cover it is a criticism of. And this takes a step more than Belushi did as this Parody changes the words as well.
The question is the same though - can a “Parody Version” link be made to a “Cover Recording”, or only to the original “Work”?
Short answer is no, because “parody version of” is a Work-Work relationship only. Seems like a Work - parody of - Recording relationship would only apply in a tiny number of cases (and probably be misused more often).
The Belushi/Cocker case would seem to fit a Recording - parody of - Recording relationship, but again, I wouldn’t see that getting used often.
