Cover vs. Original

Loverman


This is a example for a song, in which the cover version is a great improvement over the original. Metallica's version is one of my all-time favorite Metallica songs, whereas the original is a mediocre punk song.

- TomGaines, Landshut, Germany, 22.09.2005


Metallica
1998

vs.

Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds
1994

CD-Cover: Metallica - Garage, Inc. 49.9 % 50.1 % CD-Cover: Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds - Let Love In
Results of the voting: Cover versus Original
Click on the cover for listening Click on the cover for listening
Metallica 2089 Votes Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds

Comments about Loverman:

1 2 3 4 5
Metallica cover is not bad, but it still just cover. It is less atmospheric and rather boring after a while. Nobody sings Cave like Cave :o)
- Rep, Prague, Czech Republic, 23.02.2011
to compare those to songs is necessary to listen all the albums songs. you'll just see that Nick's Cave "Let love in" is one of the best albums ever. I was a Metallica fan in the early '90, forgot of them during Load-Reload and like them with Garage inc. But Loverman sounds better with Nick, listen all the album and you'll see why
- Tudor, Corabia, Romania, 22.02.2011
Metallica Cover is much more superior that the original song.
Nick seems to be diying while he sings.
Its a greet song, but the original is just for some moments of our life.
- Filipe, Lisbon, Portugal, 18.01.2011
Personally the Cave version is darker and sexier for me, although it could just be that ol' James never did a tour of duty in The Birthday Party. When Hetfield sings it sounds like an old man wanking into his coat (although that's a perfectly good way of interpreting the lyrics) whereas when Nick sings it you know it's gonna hurt but it will change your life.
- Dan, Liverpool, England, 29.10.2010
Nick Cave pawns! can listen to his song over and over again.
- NC for life, Oslo, Norway, 05.09.2010
Who is the bloke that labels Nick Cave's original as being mediocre? It would be painful and telling at the same time if he were somehow involved in the industry.
It comes down to personal preference, I agree thus far. But to dismiss a good song by one of the best musicians out there, having the impudence to talk as such about deeply felt music and great writing and composing, is just...
You'd better not meet with Stagger Lee, TomGaines.
- Mister, Craiova, Romania, 13.04.2010
The Metallica cover of this song is silly at best - absolutely horrid at worst. The vocal arrangements aren't sexual - They are ridiculous. I honestly hope that I never even accidentally hear Metallica playing this song... Ever again.
- RevMag, Cincinnati, United States, 06.04.2010
I am a fan of both Nick Cave and Metallica, and I love both versions. That being said, I prefer the original.
- Dennis Owens, Kansas City, United States, 19.03.2010
Nothing Nick Cave does is mediocre, but with that being said I have to agree that I like the 'tallica version better. It's not just the focus given on the vocal mentioned by someone earlier but I also find the choice to drop the key of the song a 1/2 step gave it an extra layer of uneasy sexuality. I by no means want this to be seen as me saying One performer is better than the other, because I think they are both stellar. I don't know if Metallica could have covered any other song and got such a positive result.
- Rich, Olympia , United States, 23.05.2009
I really like nick cave, and hats off for the writing, BUT metallica really owns this song and did an amazing rendition of it.


- Anca, Brussels, Belgium, 04.02.2009
1 2 3 4 5
««« Top