Worst Ever Cover? - Page 2

shakermaker · 19-09-2007, 18:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stanleymad

Limp bizkets [sp?] version of - man behind blue eyes is as good as The Who's

You're obviously quite ill; your general perception is severely affected. If in normal condition, you would have the ability to judge that each member of Limp Bizkit should be shot in the head for butchering The Who's classic.

You should get that checked out, it could be dangerous.

Stanleymad · 19-09-2007, 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

You're obviously quite ill; your general perception is severely affected. If in normal condition, you would have the ability to judge that each member of Limp Bizkit should be shot in the head for butchering The Who's classic.

You should get that checked out, it could be dangerous.

Actually i am ill so good guess

but to surprise u even more the above song by the who [saves typing it out again] is one of my all times favs from a classic rock film soundtrack, so i still stand by my opinion the singer did do the song as well i said not better than Legend Rodger Daltrey, as every ear is tuned different i need not go further

shakermaker · 19-09-2007, 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stanleymad

Actually i am ill so good guess

but to surprise u even more the above song by the who [saves typing it out again] is one of my all times favs from a classic rock film soundtrack, so i still stand by my opinion the singer did do the song as well i said not better than Legend Rodger Daltrey, as every ear is tuned different i need not go further

Still, that doesn't explain your total disregard for the fact that Limp Bizkit are utter rubbish (not even debatable - difference in ears' tuning or not), and Fred Durst is possibly the biggest prat walking the planet... thus making him grossly unworthy of covering a Pete Townshend penned tune.

WillowTheWhisp · 19-09-2007, 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

You're obviously quite ill; your general perception is severely affected. If in normal condition, you would have the ability to judge that each member of Limp Bizkit should be shot in the head for butchering The Who's classic.

You should get that checked out, it could be dangerous.

I actually prefer their version and love the video.

shakermaker · 19-09-2007, 20:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I actually prefer their version and love the video.

Must be a bug going round or something.

It's a horrid, horrid version.
It's sung (I use the term extremely loosely) without any feeling or empathy with the words.
Townshend wrote the song with a very specific feeling in mind; and I fail to see how anyone can cover a song written in this manner and do it any justice at all?
Especially when the only reason it was recorded was for a film release (Gothika).

Stanleymad · 19-09-2007, 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Still, that doesn't explain your total disregard for the fact that Limp Bizkit are utter rubbish (not even debatable - difference in ears' tuning or not), and Fred Durst is possibly the biggest prat walking the planet... thus making him grossly unworthy of covering a Pete Townshend penned tune.

Mmmm shows your arrogance & disregard for other opinion im no way a fred durst fan of any kind in fact more a who fan, i mearely said his attempt was good better than any of his other mumbles but he kept the song in its original format as such, seems the judgement of the man himself is reflecting on his ability for that song, suggest use ears rather than eyes, thats what music should be about.

I could say how rubbish listening Chris Farlows version of 'Out of Time' was utter crap ruined a fantastic song, penned by the stones whom did a suburb version tho passed to Farlow with stones doing the backing vocals the soul version of it doesn't match the stones one, same could be said for 'Ruby Tuesday' by Melanie who murdered it in cockney drawl as did Marrianne Faithful with 'As tears go by', utter classics along with their many back catalogue in their own right orchestrated & sung how it should be - yet passed over to wannabes to destroy it BUT at the end of the day they get the royalties & song writing credits & rights, so i'supose some artists are not bothered by how good or worse covers can be. But thats my opinion some others may prefer their versions more, I think there are many worse senarios but again my opinion is on hearing the song not by judgement of the visual.

As i keep saying MY OPINION i think u miss the object of the thread, whom openly asks for opinions, not righteousness

. U seem to forget music is individual - thats why its fantastic!

shakermaker · 19-09-2007, 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stanleymad

As i keep saying MY OPINION i think u miss the object of the thread, whom openly asks for opinions, not righteousness

. U seem to forget music is individual - thats why its fantastic!

Good god, you should write Bon Jovi tunes with the amount of utter cheese oozing from that!

I was hardly disregarding your opinion, I just thought you were wrong and had no reason to your opinion. If I had disregarded it, I would have nothing to argue with

Look, if you'd like to go through life just accepting things people say and not making any form of argument just because that's their opinion, then fair enough. However I would rather see reason and depth to an opinion, rather than a forthright "it's my opinion so don't question it".

It's all fine & dandy discussing what you like, but WHY you like it can be discussed as well you know.