Talk:Cover version

The 'Incentives to make duplicate recorded versions of a song' section
This reads like a kid's essay or something. Nothing is necessarily false but it doesn't really add anything beyond the author's speculations about cover intent which isn't very relevant IMO — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.231.153 (talk) 03:40, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

"Cover" a buzz word
I am 71, I do not recall hearing this word before the 1990s. I may have, but as memory serves me, a began to hear it a lot rather fast, in the scheme of things. I submit that it became a buzz word, or what the Fowlers called a "vogue word", and as such indicated ones sophistication, insider awareness, or hipness when used. Hence excuses were in place to use it as much as possible, so that artists viz. singers or instrumentalists didn't perform a song anymore, they did, or made, a cover, and their rendition was a "cover" i.e. they "covered" it. Gag me with a spoon as Moon Unit Zappa used to say. I like to sing in the shower, and this morning I did a cover of "Ol' Man River". I don't know whether I'd covered Jerome Kern or Paul Robeson (who probably 'covered' it himself). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.112.111 (talk) 03:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Gag me too! Can't stand it. Has there been any published criticism of the hysterically frequent use of this term? Who started it? What huge power made it so universal so fast? My main thought on this has always been: a great song covers a fine singer, whereas a great singer does not try to cover a fine song. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:28, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with these concerns - I raised them a few months ago at WT:MOSMUSIC, but no-one seemed keen about taking any action. What is the best course of action?  A coordinated approach, but where? WT:WTW?  Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:22, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
 * NPOV? Undue weight? I don't know. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:14, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

It seems to me that, while the term has been around for quite a while, it came to prominence with the general public during the 1960s. Particularly after the Beatles popularity it became rather du rigor for any band which desired to be perceived as legitimate to write their own songs rather than recording material written by others. Calling a band a "cover band" was somewhat derogatory: a cover band might have some sort of local following playing at bars, high school and college dances and the like, but that was it unless they wrote their own material. In the 950s, nobody card that Elvis never wrote a song, but now that could be a big issue. Of course, there were exceptions. Lots of groups did Dylan, Carol King, etc., but usually had to do at least some of their own stuff in order to be judged as legitimate. Wschart (talk) 18:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The term was not (note: not) normal in the 1960s. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:41, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

"Youtube Vocal covers" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Youtube_Vocal_covers&redirect=no Youtube Vocal covers] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. TartarTorte 17:29, 7 September 2023 (UTC)