[mb-users] Track-track relationship
fox.box at gmail.com
Wed Jun 1 21:23:41 UTC 2005
On 6/1/05, Alex Mauer <hawke at hawkesnest.net> wrote:
> Björn Krombholz wrote:
> > IMHO it doesn't matter if a cover version is a serious one or just a parody.
> I disagree. If it's someone else playing the same song, it's a cover.
> If it's someone else singing different words to the same tune (as is the
> case for most parodies), it is not a cover. I don't think Weird Al's
> "Amish Paradise" is a cover by any stretch of the imagination.
Depends of the definition of "cover version". For me it's a
reinterpretation of any kind.
F.e. Apocalyptica's "Nothing Else Matters" (Metallica's song played by
4 celli). There are no lyrics on this reinterpretation, they even
changed the whole instrumental arrangement. Is it a cover or
something else? One thing for sure: it's no parody. ;)
Another example: Someone "covers" a song, but also translates the
lyrics and title of the song to a different language. Is it a cover?
And another one: Someone takes your explanation above and "changes" a
song following those rules, but he doesn't create a parody. How would
you classify this piece of music?
If you say it'd be a cover why can't a parody - derived from the same
concept of "changing" - be one as well? If you say it'd be no cover
but "something else" then i might agree in adding this "something
else" relationship type. Parody itself is something too special for my
taste. You can probably find hundreds of such special classes.
More information about the MusicBrainz-users