Why did artists stop releasing their own versions of others' recent singles (as new singles or album tracks), as they did in the '60s?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I guess that the consolidation of the record and radio businesses means that there aren't really "regional hits" these days in the same way, or small hits on small labels, that artists on bigger labels can cover and try for a big hit with (though there are still regional hits, kind of). But why doesn't some new artist at least take a failed single from, say, the first Kelly Clarkson album (or a great song that wasn't released as a single), re-record it, and release it as a new single? Is it because radio stations wouldn't want to risk pissing off RCA or Kelly's management (in this case) by playing the new version?

There was also the situation where a label, producer, or songwriting team would arrange for the same song to released several different times by different groups, trying for a hit. (Or at least I guess that's what was happening, when the same song would be recorded by several different girl groups, for example.) Why doesn't that seem to happen anymore - or does it?

(Then there was the thing where UK bands would cover songs that were national hits in the U.S., and had new hit singles with those - seems like that could still go on (or vice-versa), if someone wanted to try.)

― morris pavilion (samjeff), Thursday, 6 April 2006 17:42 (twenty years ago)

One thing's for sure, getting Travis to cover Britney (and all the horrors that followed) is not a fair exchange.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 6 April 2006 17:46 (twenty years ago)

Because everybody wants to be special now.
xpost

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 6 April 2006 17:47 (twenty years ago)

But see: "Video Killed the Radio Star," "Set It Off," "My Toot Toot," "Macarena," whatever song that was that Leann Rimes and Trisha Yearwood did at the same time, etc...

― xhuxk, Thursday, 6 April 2006 17:49 (twenty years ago)

My "Con Air" Will Go On

― Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:07 (twenty years ago)

Probably when entertainment lawyers gained the wherewithall to put exclusivity clauses into the contracts...

― James Mitchell (James Mitchell), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:11 (twenty years ago)

these days it's not about songs, its about artists. it used to be about selling songs -- now labels are very focused on selling their artists, with the material being largely secondary. if you're recycling someone else's song, you're diluting your own brand.

also, artists are catching on about the cash cow that is music publishing, so they'd rather get a piece of that than let some other writer make money off their hit song.

― the man from mars won't eat up bars where the tv's on (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:20 (twenty years ago)

JBR OTM

― Chairman Doinel (Charles McCain), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:26 (twenty years ago)

Another thing is that since artists aren't having to put out two or three albums a year, they don't have to scramble as much for material.

― Chairman Doinel (Charles McCain), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:28 (twenty years ago)

a lot of pop songwriters have turned to nashville, where there's still a culture of song-peddling.

― the man from mars won't eat up bars where the tv's on (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:31 (twenty years ago)

Thanks (a few x-posts) - I figured something like the "brand" thing would be a bigger consideration now, though it still surprises me a little that new artists (and their management) would bypass a great song that's already been written by top-flight songwriters (and maybe sits buried, languishing, on someone's CD, so it's not too strongly "identified" with the previous artist), rather than paying for all new songs which may not be as good. Though I guess once you're signed these days, with the $ of a big label behind you, your team can afford to hire the same songwriters (or others of their caliber).

― morris pavilion (samjeff), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:37 (twenty years ago)

They stopped around the time The Beatles established the trend of the act being supposed to write their own material. The trend lasted somewhat longer in R&B, but from "What's Goin' On" onwards it became unfashionable in R&B too.

A good thing it stopped. Was a bad habit. Hopefully they will soon start making cover versions of older hits too.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:39 (twenty years ago)

Of course there are exceptions, like "Macarena" and "Dragosta Din Tei"

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:40 (twenty years ago)

Well, there was that "Don't you wish your girlfriend was hot like me" song...

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:41 (twenty years ago)

I guess also you'd figure that if a song didn't work as a single for Kelly or Avril (or wasn't deemed single-worthy by their people), then no one's going to risk trying to make it a hit with Miss Unknown.

― morris pavilion (samjeff), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:42 (twenty years ago)

i totally love covers and i always wish i heard more new ones on the radio. but, yeah, i get the reasons why you don't hear as many as you used to. i take what i can get. i even loved that roxette eurodance cover. and the tainted love thing i hear on the radio every 5 seconds. i'm surprised ilmers don't talk about that one more. it has that total der shuffle groove going on.

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:49 (twenty years ago)

that Rihanna song (the "Tainted Love" sample) is my favorite single of the year.

― Big Willy and the Twins (miloaukerman), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:53 (twenty years ago)

i'm with scott. generally speaking, a live show w/o a cover of SOMETHING is, at least, a very minor disappointment, even in the context of a fantastic original set.

― gbx (skowly), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:54 (twenty years ago)

(i mean, i realize we're talking about releases and not live shows, but covers in general are getting fewer and further between, which is totally irritating)

― gbx (skowly), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:54 (twenty years ago)

scott seward, send me yr snail address.

― the man from mars won't eat up bars where the tv's on (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:55 (twenty years ago)

on mixtapes and other such places, aren't artists today constantly sharing rhythms? isn't that sort of the same thing?

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Thursday, 6 April 2006 18:57 (twenty years ago)

This recent occurence seems to be very reminiscent of how they did it in the 60's:

From Wikipedia:
"Tori Alamaze was a backup vocalist for the hip hop duo OutKast. She used to be a makeup artist for about 10 years, and she worked with Faith Evans, Erykah Badu, TLC, Xscape, Monica, Outkast, Busta Rhymes etc. When she got her big break when somebody offered her a record deal. From there, she worked on her debut album, and appeared in opening acts for more popular bands today, including the Black Eyed Peas. Her first single was "Don't Cha", produced by Cee-Lo Green. It wasn't very successful, only peaking at #58 on the Billboard Hot 100 Singles Chart. But the Detroit native says the label never shot a video for her single, nor did she receive proper marketing. According to industry chatter, Tori’s version of “Don’t Cha” was intended as the label’s next big thing, but then Universal Records decided the single wasn’t the right move. Tori was subsequently dropped from the label just as her song was beginning to get some positive attention. The track was re-recorded, with a group known as The Pussycat Dolls, and included a rap verse from Busta Rhymes. The song climbed to #2 on the Billboard Hot 100. The multicultural female posse imitates Tori’s vocal inflections and adlibs to a tee, while adding Busta Rhymes to the mix and keeping Cee-Lo on production."

― ianinportland (ianinportland), Thursday, 6 April 2006 23:22 (twenty years ago)

five months pass...

see also: sinead oconnor "nothing compares 2 u," natalie imbruglia "torn."

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Saturday, 16 September 2006 15:16 (nineteen years ago)

it still surprises me a little that new artists (and their management) would bypass a great song that's already been written by top-flight songwriters (and maybe sits buried, languishing, on someone's CD, so it's not too strongly "identified" with the previous artist), rather than paying for all new songs which may not be as good.

do artists actually pay for new songs? i thought the only pay was in future royalties, which would be the same whether it was a new song or an oldie.

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Saturday, 16 September 2006 15:19 (nineteen years ago)

This is still done - the only good/successful stuff Jose Gonzalez has released are covers of the Knife and Kylie.
And its often done in the UK where singles are still sold and cover versions are often stuck on as a B-side, such as the Sugababes cover of the Arctic Monkeys and all the acoustic covers of "Crazy" floating around.
Or any of these
http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/the_singles_jukebox/the-b-side-special.htm

― danzig (danzig), Saturday, 16 September 2006 15:31 (nineteen years ago)

see also: bob dylan "to make you feel my love," quickly covered as a country hit (garth brooks) and a pop hit (billy joel).

― fact checking cuz (fcc), Saturday, 16 September 2006 16:09 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.