Covers vs. Originals

Sometimes covers of your favorite songs are better than the originals

Katherine Ely / Contributor / The USD Vista

History has shown us that a song is not always unique to the original artist who created it. It has also shown us that just because someone sings the first rendition of a song, does not necessarily mean they sang it best. There are many examples of songs that were given a second, third or tenth life. For instance, some might think that the song “Moon River” is a Frank Ocean original. 

When I first heard Ocean’s 2018 release, I was surprised to find out that it was not his original song. It was actually a cover of the song “Moon River,” written by Henry Mancini and sung by Audrey Hepburn in the 1961 film “Breakfast at Tiffany’s.” And yet, upon its release, Ocean’s sorrow-filled version of “Moon River” became an instant success, one that many attributed to Ocean. Listeners tend to forget that it was, in fact, Mancini who was the mastermind behind this powerful ballad.

Whether or not the cover is more popular than the original has been widely debated over time within the history of music. The merits of an original song are often compared against the many versions produced after the initial release. Some dedicated fans starkly reject covers of their favorite artist’s songs, while others contend that a cover song can revive – and even improve – the work that came before it. However, I believe that one’s preference between the two is based solely on the individual. 

I happen to prefer John Mayer’s live cover of Tom Petty’s 1989 classic “Free Fallin’,” not out of disrespect for Petty, or his artistry, but because I simply like Mayer’s rendition more. Mayer might be singing words written by another, but he revolutionized the instrumental, the melody and the overall essence of Petty’s original version, so much so that it is almost unrecognizable. 

Arguably, the difference between a cover and an original song is how well the song is reimagined. A cover usually refers to the reinterpretation of a song in which the artist adds an element of their own musical style. 

Jeff Buckley’s 1994 rendition of “Hallelujah” is a great example of a creative reinterpretation of a song. The original song, written by Leonard Cohen, went unnoticed for nearly a decade before gaining the recognition it truly deserved. 

What makes Buckley’s cover of Cohen’s composition so unique is the reimagination of the song’s spirit. Cohen’s piece was originally intended to be a funeral hymn. Buckley’s creative approach gave the underappreciated ballad a new life – one that would become legendary and synonymous with his alternative rock sound. 

While there were some major stylistic changes between the cover and the original, the live recording Buckley released perfectly captures the tone of Cohen’s hauntingly beautiful lyricism.  Though I believe that personal preference should be respected, I do not particularly love when a song is covered too often.  Some songs were originally created with the artistic intent to be heard a certain way. This is a key point that people use to argue that covers can be seen as a sign of disrespect toward the original artist’s vision for a song. 

This side of the debate argues that it is somewhat unethical to taint the art of another artist who surely wrote the song to be heard in a specific way. Personally, I see where these people might be coming from. I would only qualify that by adding I only see it as disrespect when a cover becomes popular and the cover artist did not try to reinvent or make it their own. 

Personally, I love Elvis Presley’s “Can’t Help Falling In Love.” I might even consider it one of my all-time favorite songs. And yet, whenever I hear covers of that song – which are usually rife with derivative melody lines and instrumentals – it makes my skin crawl. I have the same issue when I hear people try to cover Christina Perri’s “Jar of Hearts.” My reaction to those two examples is because I feel there is nothing memorable in these covers that make them new or special. 

I know that this seems like a trap, but both Presley and Perri’s songs were intended to be ballads. The soft nature of their lyrical composition and instrumental tone lends itself to this conclusion. Unless someone releases a rock version of “Can’t Help Falling In Love,” which will most likely not occur anytime soon, then I believe it could potentially ruin the intent of the original.  

I also feel that covers, when overdone, can strip the original of its meaningfulness. For example, I believe that “Can’t Help Falling In Love’’ is excessively covered. I feel that frequently covered songs can sometimes water the original down to a point where it is no longer enjoyable because it is so simple.  In my mind, when a song as good as “Can’t Help Falling In Love” is covered so many times after its initial release, it could potentially lose its authenticity as well as its popularity. 

However, of course this is not always the case. A lot of the time covers can make a song grow in popularity. Take for instance “I Will Always Love You,” a song originally  written  and performed by Dolly Parton in 1974, which skyrocketed in popularity when Whitney Houston covered it almost two decades later in 1992. However, while songs may gain popularity as a result of a cover, this may create similar problems to the ones mentioned above. It may also cause listeners to disassociate it from the original version. For me, listening to covers of “Can’t Help Falling In Love” is almost frustrating because I feel Presley is no longer given the recognition he deserves for such a beautifully crafted song. 

But, as I said, a lot of the time, covers are a good starting point for bands to gain more recognition. For instance, we might know “Twist & Shout” as being the hit song that helped propel The Beatles’ popularity in the U.S. The Beatles are widely known for their numerous one-of-a-kind hits. And yet the foundation of their career in the U.S. began with a cover originally by the group The Isley Brothers. 

During my research, out of all the famous songs I discovered were actually covers, there was one that shocked me the most. We all should recognize female soul legend, Aretha Franklin, who is most recognizable for her recording of the song “Respect.” Interestingly, Franklin did not write the original song. 

Otis Redding, who famously wrote and performed songs like “Sittin’ On The  Dock Of  The Bay” and “A Change Is Gonna Come,” was the original mastermind behind the song. Although Franklin’s version of “Respect” was not the singer’s first hit as an artist, it was the song that catapulted her to stardom. 

I believe the reason that Franklin’s rendition is usually referred to as the original is because of how much she incorporated her own style into the song. Franklin’s retelling of “Respect” differs from the original because it is from the perspective of a woman. This fact alone has propelled the song into pop culture as an iconic and empowering anthem in the feminist movement. 

Redding notably supported Franklin for her cover. He once admitted that he no longer felt the song belonged to him considering the weight Franklin’s version held for so many people. 

Ultimately, we should attempt to distinguish covers from their originals because it is important to understand the history behind a song and where it came from. Truthfully, you might listen to covers all the time without even realizing it. 

I honestly believe that music truly is subjective to the listener, and there is no harm done if you prefer a cover to its original. Sometimes, I prefer the cover to the original, and other times I enjoy the original more than the cover. It’s all personal preference. Instead, I encourage people to exercise a consciousness in their music listening. Do your research, learn about the origins of a song, who wrote it and what you can learn from both versions. There is always something to appreciate in the diversity of artistry.