I’m assuming most anyone who pays attention to my blog is already familiar with Dirty Loops and their recent wave of youtube videos. Stunning pocket and ideas from these guys, not to mention complete command over their respective roles in the band…
Here’s the discussion for today: Does this video change your perception of the song they’re playing? Are you the kind of person that immediately dismisses Rihanna’s music as “crappy pop” without ever hearing it? Does her production and vocal alone account for the music snobs thumbing their noses? Do Dirty Loops give the song new cred simply because they’re great players? What if the actual Rihanna version had always been like this, but just with her voice on top?
I think the Dirty Loops do a great job of exposing the genre-ism in all of us.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 23, 2012 at 12:15 am
nate babbs
“Does this video change your perception of the song they’re playing?”
No. Because the song they’re playing is SO far gone from the original that it’s basically it’s own new song. Don’t get me wrong, clearly these guys know whats up. But to call this a “Rihanna cover” is a stretch. A barely quoted melody with new lyrics, completely re-harmed progression, new tempo, new groove…almost completely unrecognizable on all fronts, save for the lyrical rhythm of the chorus. So to me, it seems like a sneaky way to get people to watch their videos. It’s almost more like a parody rather than a cover.
Now, I get that it’s youtube, and the whole point of youtube is to get as many people to watch your videos as possible…but my guess is if they called this video what it was (“Live 80′s-fusion-keyboard-demo jam”), we wouldn’t be having this conversation. But it’s because it started out as a pop song, suddenly it has more merit and everyone poos themselves. So to answer your other question: “Do Dirty Loops give the song new cred simply because they’re great players?” No, because I think it’s wack. not because I don’t think they can’t play (far from it), but rather they CAN’T give it more cred since I don’t feel they’re even covering the song in the first place and are just using Rihanna’s name to get people to watch them.
I guess this raises a whole new sub-question (you’re welcome)…how close to the original does a cover need to be to still be called a “cover” of an already existing song? It’s like, if I recorded a 7 minute, 12-bar-blues in a samba feel, and in the middle of my KILLER scat-singing at the 5 minute mark I sing the first line of “Hey Jude,” does that suddenly make it a “Hey Jude” cover?
As a side note (and I feel I need to reiterate my admiration for their obviously astounding musician-ship and domination of their instruments), I can only listen to about a minute of this before I’m all “late 80′s-fusion-keyboard demo”-d out.
PS. HOLY WHOA this got long
January 23, 2012 at 12:26 am
nate babbs
quick follow-up: Just re-watched the other video of theirs I’ve seen (the Justin Bieber cover)…and I guess the whole point I wanted to make is that I feel its quite the opposite of your “does the pop song suddenly get more cred cuz these guys rule.” It’s a bummer to see such great musicians so shamelessly think they need to cover (in my humble opinion) crappy Top 40 club hits in order for people to like them.
In their defense, it did get them on the radar…so maybe they’ll stop with the covers and do their own thing…
That is all. for real. I’m done. =)
January 30, 2012 at 10:16 am
Mark
While I can completely appreciate that these guys are incredible, I still don’t enjoy listening to the song, mostly because the style that these clearly amazing musicians are playing in is just not enjoyable to me. Don’t think they’re bad, but wouldn’t choose to listen.