C2C is "just" covers

[djBuffoon 12,120]

I think both me and the op are referring to the belittling nature of the word "just". If you know absolutely anything about the genre or it's history, you wouldn't be using these words. And it's actually more appropriate to refer to them as renditions, not "covers".

Correct. Renditions, or even "interpretations" would be closer to what it is.

Jazz songs, unlike most other genres, aren't defined by who originally sang them (i.e. "Bad Romance" will always be defined by Gaga, etc). If I were to perform or record that song, it would be a cover.

But jazz songs are attributed more to the person who composed them than anything else. You wouldn't call a jazz singer a cover artist, you wouldn't call a jazz band a cover band. It's, technically, not the right term.

[PopBitch 1,218]

I suppose this is directed at me too. It was covers. Covers redo a song by another composer/artist and either cover it faithfully, true to its original form, reimagine it, reinterpret it. I said nothing wrong. Cover isn't some bad word. It's not original music. I also said I thought it was a good idea as a side project before her next original material album for the fan base she has built. I am not someone who thinks it was a bad idea at all. These songs have been done to death, and the duets is a nice twist with someone so respected and to showcase another side to Gaga You can only interpret these songs so many ways. She will probably hit some out of the ball park and maybe some not in comparison to earlier versions. She has a lot of people to be compared to like Ella Fitzgerald, etc. She's not re-inventing the wheel. She's doing service to standards that have been done by greats and by doing this, she is exposing songs to a younger generation, which is a good thing. Hopefully, they will get a hit out of one. Tony's duet with Amy Winehouse won a Grammy. Maybe they can too. I hope so.

All I said was, I guess to you, I'm not sure, that, no, she doesn't need to go do another jazz album after, which you seem so hell bent on seeing her do because it's her passion you say. I said every time you turn around she has a passion for her next project, '80s rock, power ballads, hip-hop, acoustic. So who knows the way the wind blows. But I don't for a second believe Gaga is going to give up her next album to a niche genre, more sedate. She only has so many years to capitalize on the Fame/Fame Monster megastardom. She isn't going to toss her huge fan base to the side for a small niche right now. There's nothing insulting about covering standards. I said if she went down that road past this one-off right now, she would turn into Michael Buble. He's respected, but it's not the Gaga I want. You want her doing more old jazz standards. Fine, she can become Rod Stewart doing Book I, Book II, on and on of the Great American Songbook, like he's doing, while his fans are pissed he writes no original rock music anymore. Of course, he's in his 60s. He finds it nice money to record these.

Gaga is young, but she is closing in on 30. She has a lot more to do as far as original music and she wants to make her mark and leave a legacy of great music, which every songwriter wants to do, and with her persona and energy on stage, I don't see it being SedateGaga. She's got years ahead of her to do that.

[Gagz 2,579]

Correct. Renditions, or even "interpretations" would be closer to what it is.

Jazz songs, unlike most other genres, aren't defined by who originally sang them (i.e. "Bad Romance" will always be defined by Gaga, etc). If I were to perform or record that song, it would be a cover.

But jazz songs are attributed more to the person who composed them than anything else. You wouldn't call a jazz singer a cover artist, you wouldn't call a jazz band a cover band. It's, technically, not the right term.

This is true, but they're still considered covers. If i covered BR, that would be my rendition of BR. The terminology is the same both ways. "Cover" isn't a bad word.

[djBuffoon 12,120]

This is true, but they're still considered covers. If i covered BR, that would be my rendition of BR. The terminology is the same both ways. "Cover" isn't a bad word.

I didn't say it was a bad word. Just saying there are more accurate terms.

If I sang "Ava Maria" or "Star-Spangled Banner" or "Do-Re-Mi" at a recital or something you wouldn't call that a cover, because there is no one particular band or vocalist that can claim it as their own. All covers are interpretations or renditions, but not necessarily the other way around, in my opinion.

[giskardsb 12,565]

After reading this thread, I think the quotation marks in the title should be on the "just", not the "covers"

Heh that is probably true.

I never argued it wasn't covers. I disagree with people somehow thinking it's not worth any value because of it. Jazz is about interpretation and interpreting standards is part of the genre. Not to mention as Tony said to introduce these great songs to a new generation.

[VforVendetta 2,024]

Yes they are covers andyes Jazz is mainly about covers. Get over it people.

[RBNLM 1,640]

If shes doing jazz then I prefer covers over the risk of getting "ja-azz ja ja jazz" on there.

are you kidding right? gaga writings skills are on point. if there is something genial in her songs, these are the lyrics.

[Nemo 4,293]

However, Elton John is a legend, and just about every song he sings was written by Bernie Taupin.

To be exact, Bernie writes the lyrics, but Elton writes the music.

(Now of course, we could get into a discussion of whether "the song" is more the lyrics or the music... but let's not.)

[PopBitch 1,218]

To be exact, Bernie writes the lyrics, but Elton writes the music.

(Now of course, we could get into a discussion of whether "the song" is more the lyrics or the music... but let's not.)

Two of the best songwriters brought together. It doesn't happen often. They complimented one another. Bernie the poet/storyteller/lyricist, and Elton, wrote the music, a brilliant melodist, music arranger. One couldn't happen without the other with the abundance of songs that they wrote that were simply amazing. They slipped years later in their d--g years. But their '70s music is some of the best ever made. Bernie said there was something special in the way they worked together, like ESP. He never really talked about what his songs mean if they weren't obvious. He liked mystery to be there for people to interpret it for meaning to them. He said with Elton compared to writing with others it was freeing, because all he had to do was write it like writing a poem and Elton would take it and turn it into music.

This song grabs me. It makes me emotional listening to it, haunting. The lyrics, the melody, the vocals, perfection. It's eerie how relevant it is in 2014 and it was written around 1973. It's about a kid being a ticking time bomb, a song that was inspired by true events. The way it's written, you feel sorry for the boy, who was different. It was recorded in one take.

Ticking

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYJIGYerpLg

[Rat Boy 43,560]

You have no idea what you're talking about. It is, BY DEFINITION, an album of covers. Are there any original songs here? No. Then they are covers.

It doesn't matter if covers are the standard in Jazz music. That doesn't change the fact they're covers.

Did you even read the OP. You just come into a thread feuled with anger and make posts that are meant to 'clock' or 'drag' a user but don't even make sense. It reminds of the time when you told me off for making that thread about Bruno Mars, stating that it was unnecessary and that a general Mars thread had been made two days prior even though it was actually made over a month agao.

[Chic 20,830]

Did you even read the OP. You just come into a thread feuled with qnger and make posts that are meant to 'clock' or 'drag' a user but don't even make sense. It reminds of the time when you told me of for making that thread about Bruno Mars, stating that it was unnecessary and that a general Mars thread had been made two days prior even though it was actually made a month agao.

I don't enjoy stan culture at all; my post is ages old. I read the OP and started my own debate.

Do not talk to me.

[Katie 68]

I do see a lot of negativity toward it being an album of covers. Gaga isn't even the first artist I like that has released an album of jazz standard covers. It's literally a huge part of the genre. It's not like she's releasing an album of Britney Spears covers, this is something that is done a lot with jazz. That's why there are 30234 versions from different artists of most jazz standards. Obviously there are also original jazz songs still released, but especially since it's her first jazz release, this is total normal and probably smart. 

[OpusDiaboli666 199]

I would have liked a jazz album from her or any album for that matter with covers or original songs. What got me disappointed is to hear she´s written original songs for it and now she isn´t going to release them and it is really just covers now. I´d rather she had just said that from the beginning on then I would have been fine with it but expecting originals and then only hearing covers is disappointing to me because I love her original work. I might still enjoy the album now but nut nearly as much as I would have before the promise of original work.

[Whispering 18,865]

I would have liked a jazz album from her or any album for that matter with covers or original songs. What got me disappointed is to hear she´s written original songs for it and now she isn´t going to release them and it is really just covers now. I´d rather she had just said that from the beginning on then I would have been fine with it but expecting originals and then only hearing covers is disappointing to me because I love her original work. I might still enjoy the album now but nut nearly as much as I would have before the promise of original work.

Gaga never said anything about original songs. It was Tony that said that. He's 88 years old, maybe he got some things mixed up. :)

[Emvee 8,403]

when most people here say it is "just" covers they are doing it in a way to denigrate it, which just proves ignorance of the genre and also denigrates many jazz greats along the way.  It's annoying.

 

This. End of discussion. 

 

These people complaining about C2C are the DEFINITION of pressed. Cry babies whining because they want another pop album and they're not getting it. You know Gaga can write her own songs. You have 4 albums worth of pop music from her. Let her do a jazz album or two and, please, do it without your unnecessary and ignorant judgement of the traditional jazz album. 

 

Wipe your tears on your illegally downloaded files of The Fame.