For as long as the human race has been making music there has been someone to reproduce it. Impersonation might be the sincerest form of flattery, but most of the time it's done for money. This doesn't have to be as mercenary as it sounds, if you like something and you might want to hear it live, then there is a market to supply the demand, and the laws of copyright serve to ensure that everyone profits one way or another, including the lawyers.

In the wider universe that is the music business, cover bands don't get the same recognition as the acts they copy. The perception is that they have an inherent failing in trying to be what they are not, nor can ever be, which is the original act. This is to be expected, they didn't write the songs and they didn't make them famous. But this is not what a cover band brings to the table. If you approach the business from the angle of what a cover band can do, then things can look a lot different. 

Firstly, the entire music industry needs to understand one thing. In the same way that the works of Beethoven, Mozart and Tchaikovsky have been kept alive over the years through symphony orchestras around the world, so too will the songs of Queen, AC/DC and Guns n' Roses be kept alive by geysers with holes in their jeans putting their thing down at the Dog and Duck. If you look at how the music business has progressed over time you will see the trend. Record companies want to believe that they can preserve music using electronic files, but preserving songs doesn't mean they get heard. Radio and T.V. stations playing music today employ people who can remember when U2 were recording - these days will pass, and with them the memories of the artists and their songs. Cover bands get things heard, and in doing so they create opportunities not only for themselves but for all parties concerned, which, while we're here means the venues they play in and the bodies that license the music. What can be made of this remains to be seen, however CBR has found two cents and its going in the slot. 

This website maintains that the cover band experience can be raised to a higher level, maybe not in every case, but for those bands that would want it, opportunities exist. So what's a higher level? Many would assume the main KPI for a cover band performance is how good the musicians are or what the singer can do, and these things are important, however CBR makes a different argument - it's the songs stupid, and for the removal of doubt it's the songs that make the hair stand up on the back of your neck. All bands have their big ticket items, the ones that get the crowd on their feet. They also have the stocking fillers, and it's the stocking fillers that are holding things back. A cover gig with the right songs, and take note, a cover gig where all the songs are the right songs, and yes even, played in the right order has the power to not only get a crowd up on its feet but also to then knock them back down again. 

What is being suggested here is a more scientific approach to what actually goes into a show. Rather than just a simple play list, a humble gig can be an orchestrated experience where songs are chosen for the impact they have on the audience. This should be spelled out, no-one denies that a song can affect a human being, but at the same time no one should assume that because people are jumping up and down at a gig that a song has hit its mark. People at a gig will jump up and down anyway, it's called being drunk. What you're looking for are songs that, for their duration stop you taking anything more in because your senses are on overload. It just requires a bit of thought, but a bit of thought can go a long way. Likewise some attempt to work the crowd can also make a big difference. Bands do do this, and to be fair working the crowd isn't as easy as it sounds, but again, a bit of thought. Combine these things and what you get is an audience spellbound. For good measure throw in the right amount of alcohol and you've got a winner. Done right this is the hair on your neck factor. Done right this is the higher level. It is true that a cover band is not the original act, but no one cares, because what cover bands can do is create that atmosphere whereby punters can feel that they've gone down the rabbit hole, and they aren't doing that every four years at Wembley Stadium or Maddison Square Garden, they're doing it most weekends at a pub near you. 

So what can be different?

First up CBR can acknowledge its own arrogance here. The whole purpose of this commentary is to say that the songs aren't bad, but some of them could be better, and that this can be a platform for further development. 'Better songs' is a matter of taste and CBR hardly has the monopoly on that. Also, if you start picking at a bands set list you open a can of worms. There are practical considerations, financial constraints, and a band is not a juke box - the songs take some learning. That said, the deal is simple and can remain so. In the cover band scene there are three protagonists, the bands the venues and the ones who license the music. 





This isn't going to set the world on fire, and likely no one is going to get rich. But for the copyright holders it's money for old rope. For the bands and the venues it can be better revenue. For the punters it's a better night out. Everyone wins a prize.

It's just a dream of course, but CBR can live in hope.


 Specifically, if bands are given greater freedoms with the music they are able to play then they have better tools with which to make a better show. In turn this is something that licensors can use to better promote and sell 'older' music. This happens now only it's more ad hoc and less organised. Organised is better. Venues also have a part to play by virtue of the facilities they provide. In all, this covenant of the damned, and in biblical terms were are talking here about the cheesemakers being in with the tax collectors, will work only if there is a guiding light that all parties can work towards. In case you haven't guessed the guiding light here is money.

The goal is live music performances that have an audience transfixed as opposed to just people on a stage playing someone else's songs. Ultimately this can make a band more saleable which in turn profits the venues and can be used by the copyright holders. This covenant of the damned works only if all parties have a guiding light they can work towards. If it isn't clear at this point, the guiding light here is money. 

Key to this is some degree of cooperation between the bands, the venues and the bodies that license the music. Each of these has a role to play, they will be separate roles, but each needs to understand the part played by the others. The driving force is the bands - the songs they play and the way they interact with the crowd. This is what defines the finished product and ultimately shapes the big picture. It has always been this way, however what is being suggested here is a more scientific approach to the choice of songs, and to the on stage presence of the players.