A number of weeks ago, I held a conversation with my sister (who you can find at These Gentlemen) about a stunning new record. The sales of music from the hit TV series Glee have surpassed the Beatles in record sales. And apparently a lot of people are upset about this. Now, this is understandable considering the sheer musical dynasty that the Beatles were responsible for. In the seven years before they disbanded, they recorded 12 studio albums, 13 EPs, and 22 singles, on top of the 56 compilation albums released over the course of the past 48 years, leaving them with approximately 305 songs, making nearly 15 straight hours of music, and that’s not even counting their solo careers. And apparently the cast of Glee, which have only been around the past year and a half, have surpassed this feat.
This is not entirely true, however. Whether we were misinformed, or I simply misheard, the record in question was actually the number of songs on the Billboard Hot 100 list. The Beatles have had 71 songs take place on the Hot 100 list throughout the course of their career, 20 of which actually managed to hold the No. 1 spot. Glee, however, recently surpassed them with 75 songs making it onto the Top 100 list. None of them, however, have managed to be No. 1, with their rendition of Bon Jovi’s “Livin’ on a Prayer” being the highest at No. 4. The record sales of the Beatles still trumps the Glee cast in terms of sales. The Glee recordings have sold an impressive 11.5 million in terms of sales, but the Beatles still dwarf them at over a billion albums sold.
Statistics aside though, what if what I had heard was true? Love or hate Glee, this is an issue I see a lot of. The Beatles were a phenomenal band, no one is disputing that. But someday, someone better will come along. The Beatles weren’t always number one, after all. Before the Beatles, there was the Beegees. Before the Beegees, there was Elvis. Before Elvis, there was Sinatra. And just as with everything else, there will be a successor, just as there was a predecessor. The Beatles won’t be the best forever, so there shouldn’t be such a stink when a new talent comes along and surpasses them in any manner of fashion. After all, this is the entertainment industry, so as long as we’re being entertained, it shouldn’t be an issue. Considering the fact that their music continues to be as popular as it is nearly fifty years later is an impressive feat in and of itself.
This is also not to mention that times and tastes are changing. What defines pop today is radically different from pop forty years ago. In that sense, there are plenty of people today who may not even like that style of music, and because they didn't grow up with it, they may not have that same connection with the music. In reference to Glee however, Glee has surfaced during a critical time period in our lives where the internet is like a second life to us. It’s now easier than ever to purchase music online instead of purchasing a physical copy. Plus, Glee is the first television musical to date. It’s sole purpose every week is to take an average of five or more popular songs anywhere from today’s pop culture to the British invasion of the 60s to the jazzed up musicals of the roaring 20s and who knows where else? This means that every week, they’re releasing roughly five songs that were all popular hits at one time or another. If the cover is good, which many of them are, then hundreds of thousands of people will be downloading at least one new Glee vocal each week. And at a quick and easy $1.29 per song, no one is upset about making a few purchases to add to their mp3 library. Those make for some considerable numbers in the long run, and although when Glee does eventually die, I don’t expect the sales to last quite like the Beatles before them, however there very well could be another successful group or artist that does.
But that’s not the entire issue here. This issue is faced every time a popular song gets covered by anyone. This can be said about Glee, Across the Universe, Mamma Mia, and really, any artist out there that’s ever covered another song. Just like I said in my previous “Book Was Better” post, the original isn’t always going to be the greatest. I’ve heard plenty of excellent covers in my life. They may not necessarily be “better” than the original per se, but are oftentimes a good match if nothing else. I’ve heard at least three different versions of “I Wanna Hold Your Hand”, and the Beatles version is actually my least favorite to be honest. You can make your own comparison with the list I’ve made at the bottom.
The point is, Lily Allen’s “Womanizer” isn’t as good as Britney Spears’. And just about every cover Glee-star Cory Monteith tries sucks. But I’ll tell you what, if it weren’t for the fact that they’re chipmunks, I’d even like the musicality of Alvin & the Chipmunks’ “Livin’ on a Prayer” better than the original Bon Jovi’s. And I frickin’ love that song. But they’re chipmunks, so no dice. And you know what else? I think David Cook’s take on “Always Be My Baby” is so different from Mariah Carey’s, a proper comparison can’t even be made, so personally I love them both. When two songs are so radically different, it’s best to just accept them both if you like them.
To end this week’s post, I want to post a few links to some good covers. By no means am I saying I think all of these are better than the original. Some, I am. But many of them are just good covers. Each song listed has both the original and at least one cover to follow. At least, who I think is the original. There may be a few I'm wrong about.And I’m not saying everyone should agree with me. This is, afterall my own opinion. However give at least of a few of these a listen if you haven’t already and I’ll let you reserve your own judgment. Oh and one last thing. Glee haters can rejoice because I held back. I wanted to do so many more Glee songs, but there's only a couple on here. And these will be audio only, so there's no video bias, even though Chris Colfer's performance broke my heart. Though there are a few I couldn't find a vid-less version of. And yes, I am serious about the Chipmunk musicality. Just listen to it and picture a human voice.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 comments:
1 - Sorry for the misleading info, brother! You thought what I thought though, so at least I didn't lead you even farther from the truth..
2 - I think you need to re-check your research... Beegees before Elvis?? Definitely not.
3 - The Beatles themselves did plenty of covers, if you listen to their early stuff. I have no problem with covers. I have a problem with covers that are churned out on a weekly basis for a profit. That all said, I'll give the show a chance, I promise.
1. It's fine. WIhout the misleading info, I may not have written this entry.
2. I must have gotten them backwards. I looked up highest selling artists and their times active, and I read that one started in '54 and the other was '58. Four year difference, just read it backwards. My bad, will edit.
3. This wasn't specifically about our conversation. This was in relation to the fact that I hear this all the time. You're not the only one that thinks the Beatles forever trumps Across the Universe in terms of music. And I just hear it so often that I feel many people don't really take current day musicality into consideration when deciding cover vs. original. But either way, I wasn't calling you out or anything, just making a general point after having had said conversation.
Post a Comment