COVER SONGS in Digital Distribution:

by Derek Sivers/CD Baby

It's been almost two years since we launched our Digital Distribution
program, to get your music sold on Apple iTunes, Rhapsody, Napster,
AOL, BuyMusic, MusicMatch, MSN, Yahoo, etc. (More info at
http://cdbaby.net/dd )

Once the sales reports started coming in, I thought it was funny that
I didn't recognize the top-selling artists in digital sales. They
definitely weren't the top-selling CDs. Some had hardly sold a
single CD, yet they were earning $10,000 in digital downloads.

Here's the top-selling albums list: http://cdbaby.org/stories/05/05/14/6650893.html

I was a little stumped why it was so different from CD sales, until I
asked my database a different question : "Show me the top-selling
SONGS (not albums)" - and got this: http://cdbaby.org/stories/05/05/14/8975448.html

Aha! It's cover songs! The artists who have a cover song on their
album are selling the best, all-around. Of course! Most of these
programs have a SONG-BASED SEARCH, so people go to iTunes or Rhapsody
or Napster and search for their favorite SONG - and in the search
results, they probably see their favorite artist on top, but then
they see a few below it that they've never seen before! They click
into the song, like this new version, and then click into the
artist's full album, to see what else this artist has to offer.

EXAMPLE:
Someone using iTunes remembers the song "Wonderwall" by Oasis from
1996. They go to search for it. Oasis comes up as the 1st result,
but right below that is a version of the song from an artist named
Melissa Rebronja. Who's Melissa Rebronja? They click and listen. Pretty cool! They click her name to find out more about her, and
they start to browse around her whole album, like what they hear, and
buy the whole album. Now they're a fan of her music. All because
she did her own version of a popular song. (To hear for yourself,
go to http://cdbaby.com/cd/melissar )

So now, I'm advising musicians to do a creative cover song on their
next album. Find something that hasn't been done TOO much. (Example: CD Baby has 762 versions of "Amazing Grace". Really!) Find
something that you can add your unique twist to. Then make sure to
include it on a full-length album, so that people who discover you by
that song can get turned on to your own music, and buy the whole
collection.

(Also, make sure to get your permissions and pay your license at
Harry Fox, first! Bookmark this:
http://www.songfile.com/limited_license_search.html and this:
http://cdbaby.net/dd/?f=8 )

Personally, I think cover songs are best when they sound nothing like
the original - it's more creative that way. My old music teacher said
people are imperfect mirrors. By even trying to imitate, they show
their true shape. You can help define who you are as an artist, by
how you re-create a well-known song.

Haven't missed yet ( except for this one time...)

“Personally, I think cover songs are best when they sound nothing like the original - it's more creative that way.”

Perhaps, however I believe that there is a lot to be learned by emulating what you hear. Not just the notes but also the inflections and the feel of a particular song and style can impart a flavor upon your own personal style. I’m a classically trained musician but I learned to play the bass guitar (my preferred instrument) through the process of emulation rather than classical methods. I believe that my style has now (after 25 years) become my own because of my many influences blended together and processed through my mind, body and soul.

I have always been a proponent of musicians/bands doing occasional cover tunes. An artist just starting out who learns how to play and perform by emulating their inspirations is more likely to gain the skills needed to make their own music better thru-out their career.

"We stand on the shoulders of giants" and "Nothing is created in a vaccum" ...etc.

My advise to recording/performing artists is that cover's are a great!

(But just don't go "overboard".)

Why has no one done a cover of Tiptoe Through the Tulips by Tiny Tim...maybe a fast metal version...or M. Manson could add his special panache to it.

Code, see if Me First and the Gimmie Gimmie's have done a version. (I bet they have.)

I think that it would be more beneficial to the artists themselves to create their own music rather than ripping off my perogative or something like that...

i wont mention any names or anything but it's not that hard to come up with something original, and if it is, maybe "the person" shouldn't be an artist but rather a performer... ah maybe that's the case anyway.

*happily thinks of ideas for a new song called We Bong Together in C major*

In the past there were musicians and this new 'multitrack recording technique' employing just a handful of individual studio operators using extremely expensive technology.
The first artists were recruited by eager studio operators keen to recoupe the costs of this technology. You notice the enduring artists are mainly an end result of agreements set up in the mid to late sixties between the aforementioned.
Then as not now it was most economical to sign up artists who had developed ideas ready to go, which had been formulated on simple ideas well developed.It was easy to see the talent.Today, with modern computer technology just about anyone, with enough time, can produce well recorded if badly composed music, not thought out before hand but simply pieced together from available samples or pitch - shifted, error corrected, quantised, compressed,eq'ed,compressed,limited,exited,cut and pasted,substandard material that has been 'sold'to us as representative of 'good' and 'cool' and 'the in sound'.
There are very good composer's,musicians around it's just that they are not what Sony, BMG, etc have come to see as viable. The cloned barbie doll look is in, easily marketable, short lived, cheaper than contracting a band (who write their own music).
Its so sad to see the 'Idol' type shows employing starstruck clones to sing the songs of yesterday, which have already demonstrated their abilty to generate revenue.Its not that they are better songs than those written today its just that the recording companies are no longer interested in promoting well written music because it costs to much to produce.
Its easier to use the same behind the scenes 'has been' musicians to produce mediocre same sounding
computer generated pop and shove a bimbo or dude with backwards baseball cap, filthy mouth, and exploitive of women in a half or naked array and call it good music.These modern record companies are more like pornographers than producers.
As an independant studio operator I see really great modern music go un-noticed because the modern generation have been brainwashed into believing only the old stuff is good, mainly by those who launder sexually explotive degrading crap that we have to grade from bad to really bad,but convince ourselves its good because everyone is buying it!
All the Major record companies have contributed to this sad state of affairs and after all how many Japanese director's (Sony, etc) would really have a clue about what is good in western music that they never created to start with, but simply bought the rights too and will recycle for ever, simply because its cheaper and more profitable to do so.
I could go on but when people rave about the good ol days it really gets my goat.
A lot of old pop is really bad, its only the sheer volume of songs produced from 1950 to 1980 and re-released on CD,DVD,MINI DISK,MP3,etc that have made it appear otherwise.
I am a guitarist who does'nt write fashionable music, but I do try to make good music, thats what drew me here to dmusic three years back.
there are some really great muso's here that need to get together and really market themselves
and show the world independant music can still be great!....we would like to make a living out of it as well of course, thats the problem now with file sharing and free downloads no one is going to want our music, unless they can make money out of it!

Art is evolution.