False advertising?

I recently went to see a cover band at an outdoor venue. Their promo material specifically said they were a "cover band" playing music from the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Their entire first set were originals with no covers. They sounded pretty good for a 3 piece, and were well rehearsed, but of course nothing was familar. We left after the first set.

My feeling is, if you say you're a cover band, play covers.

Thump on,

One_Dude
 
I recently went to see a cover band at an outdoor venue. Their promo material specifically said they were a "cover band" playing music from the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Their entire first set were originals with no covers. They sounded pretty good for a 3 piece, and were well rehearsed, but of course nothing was familar. We left after the first set.

My feeling is, if you say you're a cover band, play covers.

Thump on,

One_Dude

How bad were the originals? If truly catchy, I would have stuck around.

Riis
 
I recently went to see a cover band at an outdoor venue. Their promo material specifically said they were a "cover band" playing music from the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Their entire first set were originals with no covers. They sounded pretty good for a 3 piece, and were well rehearsed, but of course nothing was familar. We left after the first set.

My feeling is, if you say you're a cover band, play covers.

Thump on,

One_Dude
Did they specifically mention that they were playing “originals” in that first set? They might have been playing material other than the same-old same-old tired stuff.

Unless there was something unique about their presentation or songbook, I don’t get making an effort to hear a cover band. If one is playing at an event, whatever, it’s just a sideshow, but I’d rather hear original music.
 
Last edited:
Could they have been playing obscure covers? In Metallica's early years, they played covers from Diamond Head and Budgie. Audience members often thought the songs were Metallica originals, since the covers were from bands many people weren't familiar with.

We once had someone who had seen us play before ask if we were going to play "that silver dollar song". He was referring to "Midnight Rider". He had never heard it before, and thought it was one of our originals. :)
 
...Unless there was something unique about their presentation or songbook, I don’t get making an effort to hear a cover band. If one is playing at an event, whatever, it’s just a sideshow, but I’d rather hear original music.
Same here, it feels weird (to me) to purposely go for a cover band, and then walk out even if the originals were good. Typically, I'm excited to hear new music that is well-made. Same as I'd rather a scratch-cooked meal at a restaurant than a reheated pre-made meal.
 
At an open mic night I went to, an acoustic solo artist said "wow, I messed up my own original". I replied "why'd you tell us, we never would have known!"

Back on topic: as gregmon said, maybe the band was a short-notice replacement. That's pretty much how originals bands get paying gigs these days. :roflmao: But if it was true false advertising, that's lame whether the originals were good or not.
 
If the music is good, does it have to be familiar to be enjoyable?
Just one guys opinion, but I think most places prefer cover bands these days because so many originals bands suck. Their musicianship might be top notch, but if the lyrics and/or musical arrangement sucks….
And trust me, I’ve heard plenty of originals bands and singer/songwriters whose lyrical content was so desperately trying to impart impactful social messaging but failed because who wants to hear anyone but FZ sing about dental floss, or suffer through a 20 minute operatic opus reminding listeners to not wear their shoes in the house. While FZ is the only person I’ve heard sing about dental floss, I did hear an originals band do a song about the proper way to brush one’s teeth, and yes, the song admonishing listeners to “drop your shoes or get the dirty floor blues” covered more than half a 45 minute set.
In a nutshell, not all original compositions are up there with “I’d Love to Change the World” :smug:
 
  • Like
Reactions: urkel3000
Remember that we are musicians and are likely to appreciate music based on quality, creativity, or whatever.

Most people want to hear songs they know and like.

I like being in original bands for a variety of reasons but I also play in cover bands. When I do, I generally err towards recreating the source music as accurately as I can because that is what the preponderance of the people in the club want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NC_Rob and Fuzzbass
If the music is good, does it have to be familiar to be enjoyable?
Just one guys opinion, but I think most places prefer cover bands these days because so many originals bands suck. Their musicianship might be top notch, but if the lyrics and/or musical arrangement sucks….

Even if the originals band was talented and had good songs, it would be a problem if they billed themselves as a cover band just to get the gig. The problem is audiences: at the usual bars and restaurants, they almost always want to hear what they already know. In fact, they seem to be incapable of dancing to a tune they haven't heard a bazillion times, even if that unfamiliar tune is funky as hell. Point is: if the audience comes to hear covers, but hears originals instead, they may complain to the bar management, or simply walk out.

Yeah, that makes life frustrating for musicians who have to play Brown Eyed Sally or Mustang Girl for the thousandth time. The somewhat good news: the audience doesn't care whether the cover is cloned. All that's necessary is for them to recognize it. So, a cover band with talented musicians can be creative with these tired old tunes. (A downside is that a crappy band that plays all the usual tunes might still get gigs).
 
  • Like
Reactions: fhm555
Definitely seems like a good way for a band to shoot itself in the foot. Audiences that go to hear original music and audiences that go to hear cover tunes are not the same audiences. Bands often think playing originals mixed into their cover sets is a great way to get their music in front of more listeners, but the people who are there for covers only want to hear familiar tunes they like.

I mean, a band can play whatever type of music they want. It would be nice if they promoted the show truthfully, but if their originals were killer i wouldn't necessarily mind neither. But as far as band-strategies go: Playing a couple covers in an original set could go over well; Playing mix of originals and covers is fine if your promotional material says something like "playing a mix of originals and classics you love"; Playing originals in a covers set usually doesn't go over well. People politely sit through the originals waiting for the songs they know and love.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigboy_78
I don’t mind if a cover band mixes in an original here or there, but if I sit through a set of a cover band and don’t hear a single cover, then yeah I’d probably be a little miffed. If i’m having a good time I wouldn’t leave just because of that though
 
Things must be really slow now on talkbass. I am all for discussion topics, but what is the point of some of these threads? Seems like a really weird thing to be ranting about 1 instance of a cover band playing originals instead of the advertised covers. Personally, I would just move on from it if I were the OP as it really seems like not a big deal.
We see posts like these from time to time from members who’ve been here quite a long time with hardly any interactions. They often don’t return to threads they create.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4860