Forum thread: sick music covers

youtube.com/watch?v=G6YqCTOBZdk

2020-11-24 21:10

27 replies

no pleaaaaase xDD

2020-11-24 21:11

19 replies

no pls but you play Ed Shitran.... xD

2020-11-24 21:13

3 replies

LOL he actually sings and dosent scream?

2020-11-24 21:14

2 replies

Hm dont actually like ed sheeran (i dont mean bad to you my friend you my brother) but this guy naxalite13 linked even worse music in my ears

2020-11-25 09:50

It takes more talent to scream. Plus, the dude can actually sing pretty excellent, better than ed sharen even. And I'm not a fan of either

2020-11-25 12:01

The Craig David cover is pretty dope The Ed Sheeran cover is boring. Just because hey it's acoustic doesn't make it good. Touch is not the type of song to work in acoustic. I couldn't even recognize the song

2020-11-24 21:15

14 replies

he wrote both of those songs the redhead is a genius bro

2020-11-24 21:16

13 replies

The quality of the covers are vastly different. One is a disaster the other pretty good

2020-11-24 21:17

12 replies

i rlly like both tho

2020-11-24 21:18

11 replies

It's ok to like both. You have the right to your opinion Im just saying purely musically speaking it's a disaster

2020-11-24 21:19

10 replies

ok elitist

2020-11-24 21:23

9 replies

Why does that make me an elitist

2020-11-24 23:03

8 replies

"Im just saying purely musically speaking it's a disaster"

2020-11-25 09:10

7 replies

So because i have an education in music i can not say that? That's a lie. It's my opinion :D though based off of some truth

2020-11-25 09:12

6 replies

purely musically speaking lmao... what makes something a disaster musically speaking? Enlighten me oh music god.

2020-11-25 09:16

5 replies

Why do you have to be so rude ;( My musical genius shall not be wasted on you peasant

2020-11-25 09:24

4 replies

how am i rude? im just asking you to explain it to me. just lay it out in musical terms, i'll understand. I am genuinely curious what you mean by something being a disaster purely musically speaking

2020-11-25 09:25

3 replies

Have you heard the original song. Truth was a song made for the club. It is heavily edited, and it's vocals use sound effects and editing. So by removing those the song in the first place just feels off but more over, there is no guitar in the song. So why is there an acoustic version of the song. It's an entirely different song. The vocals, the instruments and sound effects are changed to fit an unncessary acoustic version. The other version is a Justin Bieber song that already has an official acoustic version. the original song has a guitar, uses the same vocals and does not use sound effect on said vocals. An acoustic version here is obvious to hightligt Justin biebers good vocals. By changing singer and adding a choir the original song still lives on with the same guitar notes and vocals. Do you see what i mean? It's a bit hard to explain

2020-11-25 09:38

2 replies

I mean I understand where youre coming from, but often I feel like that kind of genre-switch works. For example, the club hit Dancing on My Own by Robyn was adapted by Callum Scott to fit a ballad format, which i think really works youtube.com/watch?v=CcNo07Xp8aQ youtube.com/watch?v=z7BgY_wTNZA so i think that, while it might not necessarily work in this specific case, i think it's unnecessary to say that this wouldn't work because of the way it is written, if you get what i mean :D

2020-11-25 09:41

1 reply

I still think the "club hit" had the vocals to back up an attempt at a acoustic version? But in the end of the day outside of the things he is singing it is an entirely different song. Nothing is kept from the original except the text Even though the acoustic version is good it still does not feel like the original song at all. The lyrics could have been changed and there would be no difference in the song which makes an acoustic version useless

2020-11-25 09:44