I think that point is true but it doesn’t work well with the clips he was saying it about. I think those girls had to bring it up an octave because they couldn’t sing it in the lower octave, not just because they wanted to. I do that all the time when I’m singing for fun.
"if you're simply subordinating the musical meaning to a display of your technical skill, then you suck" I have been waiting my whole life for this sentence.
as a bassist, i'm all about the soul, i'm almost never technical, whether i'm playing bass clarinet in a concert band or wind ensemble, or rock/blues/jazz electric bass
@Rodzilla Its a fucking talent show. People dont care about how technical somebody is, they just want to know if it sounds good for them. One of my favourite TV talent show auditions is Redemption Song by Mitchel Brunings on The Voice. He just has a great voice and I couldn't care much if his technique is perfect.
Nik Gulley the entire audience is paid. To be fair if you can actually strum and write they’ll basically pull you out of line and try and sideball your ass. They don’t want real musicians on that show they want people who watch glee lol. \m/
Man, when people "oversing" like this, even if it's just a simple little song, just to demonstrate their "incredible" voice control, that annoys the hell out of me.
These people have ruined songs like "all by myself" for me. The original song is already a bit much but people just have to show off instead of sound good.
LokNWykLeer it’s more impressive for someone to be restrained. Simpler drums, bass and vocals often can be more difficult because you have much less room for error.
@@cooxy9964 No, adjusting the key would change the song. Jumping an octave is generally how you fit something to range. Edit: Of course, only if it fits the song. If the song is going down, you shouldn't jump an octave in the middle of that downward phrase. Source: Music student for 8 years.
I agree and sometimes especially if you are a beginner you don't understand how to change keys yet. Doing this until you understand it isn't hurting anybody.
Kaitlyn Baker maybe not. My mate said that someone went up an octave once and it caused some sort of resonance and this crab’s shell shattered like a glass. And also that the crab was performing open heart surgery on his uncle at the time.
I think the reason everyone is skipping octaves is because they can’t hit the high notes at that higher octave, and can’t hit the low notes at the lower octaves. So they end up octave hopping trying to keep it in their vocal range.
Honestly, I think it wasn't as egregious as he makes it out to be. It's just that the singers are probably just not that good with their vocal range. I'd pass it as forgivable compared to the other "warbles"
Idk what you mean but it's more up with the pop people. Super indie guys have a knack for using electric guitars or rather accentuating string noises when using guitars instead of focusing on these warbling noises. These people that you're talking about might be self-titled indies but you can't really be indie by copying a pop trend.
I know I can’t stand how people just sing happy birthday all the time especially around birthdays it’s almost as if the they’re singing it for someone’s birthday
@@atticusshipstone2150 They aren't talking about singing the song more than once. They are talking about the people that make the song all about them and not the subject.
@@SalimReggieray I know! Totally!! That's usually about the time I climb up onto the table, drop my pants and lay a big steaming log right on top of the cake. I can't stand it when people try to be the center of attention.
This is a critical piece of information that is criminally overlooked. Cale's performance inspired Buckley, and in doing so, it set the standard for every. single. cover. that we've heard since then. It baffles me how he's so rarely included in conversations about the song. Whenever we hear a modern cover, we're really listening to Cale's interpretation. Not to say that Buckley didn't bring something to the table; in fact, in some respects, he even improved on it. Where Cale's vocal rings with a noble, almost regal melancholy, Buckley imbues the song with a pained, aching sadness so complete that it transcends description. Cale's solo piano is excellent and served as a wonderful basis for interpretation, but everything about Buckley's instrumentation, from the choice of guitar to the the reverb-heavy tone, fits the tune brilliantly.
Also important to note that John Cale included lyrics that Cohen would perform live but weren't in the original recorded version of the song. Lyrics like "I used to live alone before I knew you" and "Love is not a victory march // it's a cold and it's a broken hallelujah" aren't in the original version but are included in basically every single cover of the song. Cale actually asked Cohen to send him the lyrics after watching him perform it live and Cohen then faxed him 15 pages of lyrics.
My belief is that warblers can't actually hold a nice clean tone for even two seconds... I'd invite them to break such belief, but they are busy trying to fit a warble on every milisecond.
There’s a time and place for everything. But it’s just not necessary here. There are certain songs it works in, though I’m not a major fan of said songs
I accompanied a girl on the piano while she sang this song this year on a school show. She sang half of it in arabic! I thought that was very cool and creative.
@@safir2241 I hear you, it's set up like it's gonna be a joke, and then the writer goes and subverts our expectations to give us just a nice story. The bastard! How dare they play with our heads in such a manner.
@@AnimeSunglasses Personally, i think it is perfect as a Christmas song.... But then again, i do have the impression that GOD supports Atheism, because all the big and known religions has fucked things up, and is worshipping their own dogmas instead of GOD. My Hallelujah is both broken and Holy, at the same time.
@@AnimeSunglasses The earlier or original version is, yes. However, several later versions, including the one Jeff covered, is more sad and broken ... And yes, i'm referring to one of the key verses in the song, which may be different depending on which version you decide to sing.
I think the "Lets make the last Hallelujah an octave higher" mostly stems from the fact that the last hallelujah is in a very low and uncomfortable note, so for new-ish (particularly femlae) singers, this is the safest most comfortable and pretty-sounding option. It's what I used to do lmao
Wouldn't the obvious fix be to sing the entire song an octave higher, make the peak higher still and then have the last Hallelujah com back down to the original level?
@@nahuel3433 I guess it depends on your register. It's more of an instinctual decision to change the one note you can't quite reach than to change the entire song's octave if it's already comfortable for you. Even if it isn't necessarily *better*
Especially considering Cohen's baritone voice. I think most people start off singing in a register they're most naturally comfortable with in their speaking voice, and by the time they get to that point in the song, they realize it's too low for them to go naturally. It indeed does sound very amateur.
@@rambunctiousvegetable2025 That's a very gatekeep-y way to maintain the structural integrity of the song. Would you seriously tell an amateur singer to stop trying to sing hallelujah just because they're breaking the meaning of the song by doing it wrong?
I once heard someone singing Radiohead's "Creep" and she sung it with such joy! And she smiled! And she brought the whole song to a wonderful heavenly place! And...yeah.
When you jumped into that girl’s cover to sing the imagined main vocal line- probably the most badass moment ever in a music analysis channel. Ice cold
I think you're spot on about most of these (especially the warbling bit), but the opposite critique of this also true: covers of this song that just the Buckley version note-for-note are boring and lame. And even Buckley does the octave up thing in the later choruses. The take-away is that a good cover of a great song is ... hard.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" There are plenty of songs with great ideas but a flaw that makes them hard to appreciate as a whole. A cover is the perfect opportunity to fix these!!
What I would love to hear is a version that mixes the Cohen and Buckley versions - the verses the way Buckley does it, then build up to the big chorus like in Cohen's original.
Well I couldn't find what I wanted to hear, so I ended up doing one myself by covering Cohen's version, with a bit of a Jeff Buckley flavour in the verses.
He's not THAT good honestly, like I can give him credit for not using a backing track during live performances but his studio recordings still have that fake, "glossy" feeling that can only be found in pitch correction
@@skepticmoderate5790 And that's fine, but if someone's job is to sing and they can't do that, then they're not really getting paid for talent. It would be like paying some 15 year old kid who puts pre-made drum loops over pop songs and calling him a "professional drummer". It's insulting to people who can sing well and don't get paid for it.
@@averybondeson3322 as a Singer myself he puts too much resonance in his nose. Which makes him lack projection and power and especially presence. Just ask him to Sing without any mic and you would see him struggle to get the same tonality. Hence why most vocal students do not sing pop and if and when they do they stand out
@John Ross No, you're just looking in the wrong places or maybe it's not the genre you prefer. The American folk/ roots scene is absolutely thriving. Tyler Childers, Arlo McKinley, Lost Dog Street Band, Cody Jinks, Rainbow Girls All incredibly talented artists but not everybody likes that kind of music. :) Cheers!
That is my problem with most creep covers, a lot of voices are good but they miss the whole point of the song. The song isn’t meant to be pretty. It’s meant to hurtful and angry. Not soft and pretty
Isn’t pitch teeeeechnically technical ability? He’s really hatin on what people are doing with the pitch and runs and stuff but in reality people make it big because people like the sound of their voice, so runs actually help and individualize the singer, giving them their own special thing ya know
jesus christ y’all are such galaxy brains. How did you reach the universal conclusion that ‘music ended 19 years ago’? As long as it makes someone feel something, it doesnt fuckin matter
@@robertsmith4157 Fun-fact: though it was Wainright that appeared on the CD soundtrack, it was actually John Cale's rendition that was in the movie. It's really worth tracking down
Ahahahhahahahahhahahaha 🤣🤣🤣it’s not their fault they just wanna shiiiiiiine and to them singing high as the heavens is how to that lmfaooo awesome comment dude
i think mostly female singers do the octave jump thing because they cant reach the low notes, and haven't bothered/dont like to transpose it up any further
A huge problem with some female singers that I've worked with is that they don't bother to develop their chest voice. Like, usually they're not even that deep down in their chest voice before they jump up. With the 3 examples, I'd say the only one that sounded like she was nearing the bottom of her range was the second one but even then she still probably could have hit the notes
Women try to sing as high as possible. I don't know why, but women being able to hit high notes is considered superior than hitting lower notes. The ideal for women is being a soparano, so they always try to show how high they go. It makes me feel ashamed sometimes as a woman who struggles with high notes but can hit low notes well. I'm in theatre communities and it's tough for us out here
@@DogNamedWatson Personally I'm very comfortable singing primarily in my chest voice using my head voice primarily as an ornament, but my singing teacher is always telling me that I should sing higher, and almost chastising me for how low I can go in scales like I should be ashamed for hitting low range. It's not that I'm against developing my range, but this idea that it's wrong to maintain my low range is wierd.
Excuse my 10th and 12th grade English teacher from that list. She traveled to go to 3 of his concerts on the same tour. Teaches his lyrics as poetry, plays his songs in class, has posters of him, never stops talking about him, and literally has kissed the man. She “is [also] a doughnut.”
As a defense for such behavior, it fails. If you *can't* sing it properly, don't sing it at *all*. You know it's a serious problem, if you're sitting at a bar, singing along to the jukebox, and a musician thanks you for not doing that shit. True story.
“Did you subvert the whole idea of musical direction in some sort of nihilistic statement?” I don’t think I’ve ever laughed so hard at anything on RUclips.
I find it wildly inappropriate to hear this song in a church. By Cohens' own words this is a totally secular song. As he wrote it the Hallelujahs are orgasms. Keep in mind this was released on his Various Positions album which is mainly about sex.
Seriously, the amount of people who claim this is a religious song is really weird and displays the fact that these people have not bothered to listen to the lyrics past 'hallelujah'.
My huge pet peeve is when people don't match the "minor fall and the major lift" lyric to how its sung. My priorities are probably in the wrong place but God it BOTHERS me 😫
@@Xjustlookatmex Yeah, I remember that. I was too lazy to write the whole thing lol. It sucks that people don't follow that part. Its my favorite lyric in the whole song. 😔
This why my cover is great...it doesn't exist yet, therefore it can't be judged because you can't get into my mind and heart my thoughts, making it the best
I actually liked the harmonies (albeit the execution left something to desire). Regarding the question: There is a whole genre dedicated to that idea. It's called minimalism. What I'm trying to get at: It's hard to call something plain bad when there is so much up to taste. The author likes the original structure and musical statement of the original chorus, and that is fine. And he made a very good and funny video about that and I liked the video and I am glad he made it. It should just be more clear that with "badly" he meant "in a way _I_ don't like it". But then, I bet some of those covers he showed have millions of views, so maybe that is clear from the beginning and I am just being a jerk. Whatever, have a nice day.
Badly actually means badly though. Something is a good cover of it if it is similar in quality and intention and production to the original. It is possible to make something which sounds nice, but isn't a good cover because it doesn't follow the song it purports to cover. Just because something is pleasant doesn't mean it is named properly.
@@Roescoe Out of curiousity, would you consider this a bad cover, then? ruclips.net/video/hcdZLTn8LD4/видео.html Because while it follows the original to the measure and even the instruments are the same, it certainly has a different production and intention. (Sorry, I could not resist :))
Sadly I don't know the song that you've linked so it'd take me a while to get the intention or atmosphere of the song. I only could rate the Hallelujah covers because I knew the song well enough.
When you know about Leonard Cohen and his poetry, these (lame-in-comparison) interpretations lack Cohen's emotional depth and clarity. He truly was the baffled king composing Hallelujah. Everyone else just wants to sound deep. (Well, if you compare the covers to the original song.)
Has no one ever heard Jeff Buckley doing this live? Because he most certainly does not follow this “rule” live. He sometimes goes up an octave, sometimes holds a note to skip lyrics, just changes it up. But in the fact that he always does it with real powerful emotion in his voice everything he does in the song always seems to work fantastically well and fit the song. This video seems to basically ask that all covers of the song change nothing about it, which would make all covers very boring
I don't ask that everyone cover the song without changes. I ask that people observe the meaning of the song and how that meaning is represented in it's melody. You could take this and go wild with it as long as you're thinking about the meaning of what you're doing.
Mabrur Hrivu Mabrur Hrivu in this case I most certainly can. The footage and recordings of him live all still exist. There is no problem talking about someone who is dead in the present tense if you are perceiving them in some format. From your understanding of the tenses you seem to want people to say “ that recording was so good” when listening to a song instead of “that recording is so good” because of the fact that it was recorded in the past. Recordings live on and can remain in the present tense. I have quite obviously assumed the premise that people know he is dead and that therefore I am talking about recordings of him.
Look up TheDooo’s version and get back to me. Don’t look at it in regards of what this guy said (who has good points but forgets covers shouldn’t be “copies”), just see if it’s actually “good”
I blame music competitions on TV. They give the impression that it's never enough to sing a song simply and well. You have to do all the vocal gymnastics you possibly can to be noticed. Otherwise you're "generic" and "boring".
This is one of my favorite songs, and I’ve listened to as many covers as I can, and honestly the biggest problem a lot of amateur artists fall into when covering this song is that they don’t actually understand what the song is about. There’s a story about how when Leonard Cohen was writing this song he wrote over 100 different versions of the verses, and a lot of covers will use a different amount of the verses in the song. The song is meant to be interpretable and different to whomever is presenting it. But the main piece of the songs premise is meant to remain intact, the irony. Too many people don’t understand that Hallelujah here isn’t used in a literal sense of praise. It’s juxtaposed with feelings of guilt, loss, manipulation, and conformity. The speaker’s Hallelujah is forced from him at first. In this way the religious imagery within the song is meant to serve as a contrast to the idea you’re presenting, some bittersweetness. Whether it is a love for life but alienation in Leonard’s version, or a celebration of sexuality contrasted with repression, the Hallelujah represent some kind of denial or deference, and coming to terms with learning that it is okay to have that which you’ve been denied. So when people sing the in a way that is overly performative, the entire theme is lost, because the song loses its dynamic appeal, and cathartic release.
Haha, lol, that reminds me of the time, back when I still went to church, a group of girls planned to sing this during service. But before they actually did, another church-lady (my mom) took a closer look at the lyrics and adviced them not to.
I think this video should be a required watch for all musicians ever. Not just Hallelujah cover people, not just singers, all musicians. If you are doing interpretation of whatever kind, always look at the music itself and bring out what is in it and what characterizes iit, rather than doing random stuff with it in order to promote your own "individuality". If done properly, there is still enough space for that in every piece without butchering it first.
Hey everyone - so, I thought (in April 2022), that I'd add a little editors note about this video, since it keeps getting a resurgence of activity every few months. Although I don't completely disown this video... I am unhappy with how poorly I communicated a few ideas. This was only my second video and I had less than 100 subscribers when I made it. At this point, I hadn't yet developed a decent sense of how to express ideas without inadvertently communicating additional ideas I don't believe in. As a result, a lot of people have come away from this video thinking that my point was something like: "there is only one way to play this song", which I don't believe at all. I don't actually even really like this song, by the way :) However, I can't possibly fault anyone for thinking that my point was "there is only one way to play this song", since I communicated my ideas quite imprecisely. What I was *actually* trying to say was that what I consider to be 'good' covers (like those by John Cale and Jeff Buckley) are those where the artist gave thought to musical structure - both of the original work and their interpretation and made a conscious choice to make alterations to it. They knew what they were changing and why. Conversely, what I consider to be 'bad' covers are often the result of a lack of this kind of deep attention. As a result, 'bad' covers often fall back on default performance behaviours (like going a semitone below the final note and then back up), producing an interpretation that sounds less effective. There are a couple of throwaway lines at the end where I try to 'cover' this point without getting bogged down by it. As a result, the point is never really made. If I was to make this video today, I would have compared what I consider to be both good and bad covers. I'd find 'good' covers that are really weird just to show how far an interpretation can go. I would also only feature musicians who are either famous (like Sean Mendes, the second example and Bono) or who have a very large following (like many of the rest but not all). I would also have spent a lot more time digging into the whole song and not just a single phrase. Again, never in my wildest dreams did I think this video would one day have well over 1M views. Lesson learned. I do still like one thing about this video though: it was when I first realised that I could talk about music in a fun, energetic way that included lots of jokes and silliness. To some extent, I found my voice here.
You made a 10-minute video of a pretentious snob bashing on other artists. If this is the focus of your videos, feel free to have a much, much larger gap between posting. Or perhaps add to the art world instead of trying to make yourself feel better by bringing others down.
Hey Tantacrul, you've earned a new subscriber with this video. I am jelous of your ability to turn on a camera and talk about the sorts of musical points I want to talk about. Would you consider making a similar video to this, but for the US' National Anthem? Please keep making videos! ❤
@@jordancyphers Aren't you trying to make yourself feel better by bringing him down with this comment? I agreed with this video entirely, and I have to say it is you who comes off as a 'snob'.
I once listened to an old street busker who had a great raspy voice but when he covered Barbra Streisand's "Woman In Love" there was one chord he kept messing up, so I walked up to him and explained what the proper chord was, and he ended up telling me his life story in between songs. A very nice memory tied to a "bad" cover version.
I haven’t seen the movie but is it playing in the scene? As in do the characters put in on, if not then there’s no reason why they should pick that version over the one that inarguably fits the tone of the scene better. Regardless of your opinion on the quality of Buckley’s version it fits better with that scene by nature.
Elliott Watt since it isn’t chronological to the time frame and you haven’t watched the movie I’d say that you have 0 basis for an opinion. “Inarguably” isn’t a word that fits here either -
Jhon Baker well no it is, because I’m right, tonally Buckley’s version fits better with the scene because it was his intent when performing it, and that comes across in the performance. Just because I haven’t seen the movie doesn’t mean I’m not allowed an opinion, just in the same way that you may have that doesn’t mean you’re right. You may want to hop off your high horse before you find yourself thrown.
I would say that the singers get caught up in the word, "Hallelujah" and it's religious meaning and feel like they can "let the spirit guide them" with the phrasing ; as long as it's sung from the "soul", it's valid.
It's the American Idol/The Voice disease; singers aren't interested in creating a deep relationship with the lyrics and singing from that place. They're concerned with making it sound superficially pleasing. And somehow they all end up sounding breathy and throaty and vapid and ultimately boring, the worst musical sin of all.
I've never been too keen on it. It sounds like they have carrots shoved up their noses and sounds a bit pretentious. They've got chops, but it ain't for me
does it make you angry that most people apparently disagree with you? It sounds like you have a bad case of "I'm smarter than most people, and pop is for most people, so I'm smarter than pop music too"
I think this is more of a critique of the annoying type of singing that has been rampant since 2013 or so. I'm not sure how to describe it other than the singer sounds like he or she is afraid of vowels. Basically the entire song "Let Her Go." Just shoot me.
No one can go as low as Cohen. You can sometimes hear him struggling to reach up to a note that most of is struggle to reach down to. Had he lived he would have ended up doing vocals that you only felt in your bones and that aggravated whales. God Cohen was good!
@@miguelchavarin7056 I mean you have a point but there's more to it than that. Singers sing in certain keys because it feels natural or right to them, and if they sing it in a different key to accommodate lower notes, the rest of it can sometimes feel wrong, if that makes any sense. I personally don't have a problem with octave jumps as long as they're meant to add to the intensity of the song. So like for Hallelujah, it's annoying when they do it every time, but if they do it once or twice during the climax of the song there's nothing wrong with that
@@benshone7703 It's a legitimate criticism. They should either sing up an octave all the way so they can reach down, or play it in a different key so that they can. And from the looks of the clips the video showed it definitely didn't look like they would have had too much trouble anyway.
Yup. Some of them have a range that probably could cover it but a lot of women don't develop their lowest notes properly. I can do it because I sing mostly in my chest voice but my sister, who technically has the same range, can barely get the notes out because she's used to singing high and her breath control isn't great
@@hellcat2449 This is certainly true, however, I do get what they mean even if they didn't express it with complete semantic accuracy: that Jeff Buckley was covering the John Cale version of the Leonard Cohen song.
I feel like your criticism of “singers singing along with an imagined lead singer” isn’t necessarily a bad thing, especially with a cover. Most audiences of a cover of a well known song will probably already be hearing the original melody in their head, and harmonizing with that absent-but-implied melody is actually kinda cool in my opinion. I feel like you even mirror this sentiment in your video response to that guy (the one with permanent “Dreamworks Face”) who talked about how modern music sucks bc science-something-something. That being said, many singers definitely do over complicate their parts in a really self indulgent way, often to the detriment of the piece. Like a drummer playing all fills and no groove.
The biggest problem with your argument is that Leonard Cohen's original version doesn't even follow that arc. Since his voice is so much lower than pretty much everyone else who covered it, he goes up into the chorus instead of down, making the chorus the climax instead of the comedown. When I realized that, it made me appreciate the original more than any of the covers (many of which are still wonderful in their own right). Some of the versions you shared here are pretty bad though, no doubt about it.
I feel like Buckley's octave jump at the end of his "Hallelujah" wasn't meant to be a vocal wank like some of the examples but more of an exclamation. Like Buckley himself said "a hallelujah to the orgasm", that final part is loud and big with a soft release and comedown towards the end of it.
Yeah but this is the problem. This guy has oversimplified the topic and basically said "A is good and B is bad." It's really more how well A or B is done that determines whether or not it's good. Let's not forget that this is all subjective, too.
Yeah, but he's earned it at that point. Launching yourself into the stratosphere on the first go-round robs you of anyway to go. You need the build up to have a conclusion.
Tip for these kind of situations in future, because I myself only learnt about this a month or two ago and my YT experience has been far better since then: If you see a video you don't want to watch (especially if it's from a channel you refuse to watch), mouse over to it and look for the three grey vertical dots, press that and from there you can click Not Interested to get YT to stop recommending you a video. You can also select Tell Us Why after that to give YT's algorithm a specific reason, which is how you can blacklist a channel from your recommended feed or in some cases tell YT to stop recommending you videos based off another one you've watched, such as if you watch a video like this, but aren't interested in future recommendations about music.
If you watch it, now RUclips will recommend more videos like this for you. Is that what you want? You need to click the option to remove it yourself, to show that you're not interested and don't want it recommended no more.
At the other end of the spectrum, it is said Leonard Cohen's favorite cover of Hallelujah was done by K D Lang, in 2005 in Winnipeg during the Juno Awards. Cohen was in the audience. Can you imagine the guts it must have taken to sing that song in front of Leonard Cohen? And excel?
While I do agree with some of the points you make, both as a composer and as a singer, I have a problem with you saying that the only way to do this song right is to complete the curve. Yes, that is the logical conclusion, it is also extremely standard. This song is, as you say, a milestone for every guitarist and singer, and many never get it right. That being said, there is more than one way to skin a cat, and right here is an excellent example. When covering this song, you have three choices, and only three. Stock standard, where your cover will be forgotten in minutes because you followed the exact same pattern as everyone around you, make it your own, where you put more of yourself into the song and take a small amount of liberty in the process, without that liberty being the focus, and taking the song and disregarding everything that has come before. When I sing this song, I take the middle road, and put more emphasis on the final lines of the verse, making that the climax, rather than the first line of the chorus. This makes it different, but not too far removed that it sounds jarring. There's a reason I do this, too. I have had over 15 years of vocal training, and if I've learned anything, its that the only way you survive this industry is by standing out just enough to get noticed. Too far, and you are tossed to the wayside. Not enough, and you aren't putting any effort or soul into it. (Ask anyone who has ever attempted to go professional, they'll tell you the exact same thing.) My original point was this: If you sing the song the exact same way every verse through, people will get bored. This is basic. You need to keep people listening, and unless you have the voice of a god, no-one will give you the time of day if you aren't being different. This is why it is so common for people to take this song, more than any other, and run with it.
yhea everyone seems to agree with the video and it just amazes me how many people forget that those are meant to be covers of the song not the original lol
@@eggboye I did like the cover from the gal at 5 minutes. Hers was actually nice. But the others just kind of, hurt my soul?? It sounded so wrong and make me uncomfortable. They broke the melody. Hallelujah is a difficult song to cover due to how important the structure is to the theme of the song. Its like trying to adjust the lineart of a picture when the lineart is the most important part of what makes the picture. However if you can make a cover that is really good and has your own flair to boot? Nothing but respect.
What a load of rubbish. You're forgetting what makes the Jeff Buckley and John Cale covers of the song so memorable. It's the warbling and cheap accentuation that make the song sound stock standard.
@@CanadaWaxSolvent what a load of rubbish. You think that there is a correct and incorrect way to cover a song when the entire point of covers is to do it how you want to do it. This video is fucking bullshit elitism at its finest and you damn well know it
Yeah but it's from a Jewish perspective, not a Christian one. It's not "about" King David, it's comparing the speaker to him, how like him, the speaker was undone by his passion for a woman, and now that they've drifted apart he's left empty and aimless, and probably won't be remembered as a glorious and idealized figure like David is interpreted as in the canon. Reading Jewish commentary on the song is incredibly enlightening and made me love the song all the more. The most common egregious edit to the song (aside from leaving out the verse about sex) is to alter the line to 'I know there's a God above', which Christian artists do either out of some desire to not blaspheme by implying doubt about their god, or out a desire to get a big cheer from the crowd when they sing it in concert...because it's certainly not for respect of the original song, the tradition it references, or even for the rest of the verse--it makes no sense in context to change the line.
@@PotatusFrye How in the world can anyone "reclaim...from the sacred realm" a word that means (and has always meant) "praise ye Jehova"? The last three letters are explicitly the shortened form of Yahweh--and this is the Hebrew, not some weird later Romance construction that's been stuck back on the word.
I actually like the "imagined main line" version. I'm so familiar with the song that I can imagine the melody pretty strongly, so the singing does feel like an actual backing
That girl at 5:50 has a really haunting voice though 😂 it’s not the same song, but I think it’s got merit. I’d use it as background vocals for an abandoned, haunted cathedral, for instance.
Sounds like a less interesting Chelsea Wolfe - especially her first couple albums. I love Wolfe's voice over spooky heavy metal is dope. I bought her albums on the release day and got one signed. I should get back into her music, I think she's released like 3 albums that I missed.
her voice is good, it's just that the harmony is absolutely, irredeemably horrible (not in terms of how she sings it but in terms of what notes she actually sings). If she just got somebody else who actually understands chord theory to write the harmony lines for her it'd be great
0:11 The "memorable upgrade" was really the work of John Cale. Jeff Buckley's recording was more a cover of John Cale's version than it was a re-imagining of Leonard Cohen's song. And am not trying to take merit and recognition from Buckley here, but trying to give some back to John Cale.
Good vid but your point at around 4:55 loses a lot of validity when Buckley himself adds variations after like the 3rd chorus or so. You can't really criticize covers for doing that when the quintessential version of that cover (and the one you're referencing) does it throughout the entire song.
A lot of people have said this and it's an unfortunate clarification that I didn't make. If you look back to the part where I show the graph, you'll notice that I say '...and you come back down for another run'. In other words, I'm talking about the early-mid parts of the song and definitely not the ending. When you know you're finishing, then you have the freedom to take it wherever. For example, the majority of the versions I show are performances of the first chorus. In terms of dramatic emphasis, that makes no sense IMO. When Buckley goes into it for time number three, he's kind of earned it :)
@@Tantacrul So Jeff Buckley ruins the cover here then I pressume? ruclips.net/video/2YjbJTS5C_I/видео.htmlm27s You should really listen to that whole cover and maybe re-evaluate why you are so hellbent on trying to enforce these rules. Jeff Buckley is all over the place in almost every chorus in this version.
and that really is just the achilles heel that lets this whole video fall apart. i sat through the whole thing waiting for something more than "they didn't resolve to the tonic the same way jeff buckley did, therefore their cover is Wrong". tell me, even if this arbitrary restriction was somehow right, how would any of these cover artists possibly have known about it to follow it?
I mean at least we know you made it in as an example! Also Cohen's version is no longer the most popular nor universally recognized version of the song
An enlightening and frightening examination of a song gone viral into a virus,. One thing I can surely be grateful of is witnessing JB perform the song more times than I can count. Every show offered a new opportunity to share a different version without the illustrated pitfalls. I miss him dearly.
I'll tell ya what pokes me in the eye about covers of this song, every time I hear this done: ...when they sing "do you?" instead of "do ya?" I mean, come on, fer f*#%'s sake. IT'S SUPPOSED TO F-in' RHYME!!!!! THAT'S THE WAY COHEN WROTE IT! Seriously.
Ahh, you mean this one? ruclips.net/video/YrLk4vdY28Q/видео.html Very odd. I listened to the second verse too, and he does it again with "overthrew you". I can't really imagine why, except that it's his own song, and he can subvert it's rhyme scheme any way he wants. So I'll give him a pass, obviously.
Everyone covers the John Cale version, not Cohen's. This includes Buckley, he is going off the Cale version. And for the billionth time, that's Cale singing in Shrek the movie, even if Rufus is on the soundtrack.
![Shostakovich - How to Compose Music Despite [ R E D A C T E D ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MCxzMYVvHBg/mqdefault.jpg)
![Shostakovich - How to Compose Music Despite [ R E D A C T E D ]](/img/tr.png)
“Just because you can doesn’t mean you should”
What every singer needs to hear.
*musician
A fking men
*person
@brendanbeck
I think that point is true but it doesn’t work well with the clips he was saying it about. I think those girls had to bring it up an octave because they couldn’t sing it in the lower octave, not just because they wanted to. I do that all the time when I’m singing for fun.
Imagine getting your cover featured then the commentator just says
*yuck*
Current Objective
SURVIVE
A kick in the head halo on pc dude
AHHAHAGAHAQHHQ
Don't sing like shit then
Well, at least the dude's now got a net worth of $170 million at the age of 21 so he's pretty much laughing all the way to the bank 😜
Imagine being Shawn Mendes
"if you're simply subordinating the musical meaning to a display of your technical skill, then you suck"
I have been waiting my whole life for this sentence.
I don't agree with everything in this video, but I feel very vindicated by the exact wording you gave for this sentiment.
as a bassist, i'm all about the soul, i'm almost never technical, whether i'm playing bass clarinet in a concert band or wind ensemble, or rock/blues/jazz electric bass
This sentence is the perfect explanation for my hate against most covers.
@@papphase860 i do tyler childers covers with as much soul as possible
you can still make or play meaningful, atmospheric music while showcasing a great technical skillset.
This gives me sudden urge to write an overly complex jazz cover of hallelujah
Hallelujant Steps
Collier's got you covered
Please do it!
@@chilala-kantunguni3416 Ok i might actually do it
@@govindanagar4623 please keep us updated
To be fair, I don't think the TV talent show crowd responds to anything but vocal runs and octave jumps.
True... 😔
@Rodzilla Its a fucking talent show. People dont care about how technical somebody is, they just want to know if it sounds good for them.
One of my favourite TV talent show auditions is Redemption Song by Mitchel Brunings on The Voice. He just has a great voice and I couldn't care much if his technique is perfect.
I mean mass opinion of talent and musical ability is technical proficiency, and speed, and not actual musicianship
Nik Gulley the entire audience is paid. To be fair if you can actually strum and write they’ll basically pull you out of line and try and sideball your ass. They don’t want real musicians on that show they want people who watch glee lol. \m/
Also, that weird stuff they do with their faces, where they try to make it seem super hard and emotional to just sing a few words
Man, when people "oversing" like this, even if it's just a simple little song, just to demonstrate their "incredible" voice control, that annoys the hell out of me.
These people have ruined songs like "all by myself" for me. The original song is already a bit much but people just have to show off instead of sound good.
LokNWykLeer it’s more impressive for someone to be restrained. Simpler drums, bass and vocals often can be more difficult because you have much less room for error.
This. A song like "Killing Me Softly" that's MEANT to have warbles, sure, go ahead and show off. But not "Hallelujah." Please.
They gotta flaunt their ego
You've described every single time hallelujah has been done on a pop idol style tv show.
When they go an octave higher it’s not because they can go high, it’s because they can’t go low. I know from experience.
Julie Camm then you need to adjust the key of the song...
Yeah I know right? But simply adjusting the pitch to something more comfortable works.
@@cooxy9964 No, adjusting the key would change the song. Jumping an octave is generally how you fit something to range.
Edit: Of course, only if it fits the song. If the song is going down, you shouldn't jump an octave in the middle of that downward phrase.
Source: Music student for 8 years.
I agree and sometimes especially if you are a beginner you don't understand how to change keys yet. Doing this until you understand it isn't hurting anybody.
Kaitlyn Baker maybe not. My mate said that someone went up an octave once and it caused some sort of resonance and this crab’s shell shattered like a glass. And also that the crab was performing open heart surgery on his uncle at the time.
I think the reason everyone is skipping octaves is because they can’t hit the high notes at that higher octave, and can’t hit the low notes at the lower octaves. So they end up octave hopping trying to keep it in their vocal range.
Seems legit
Honestly, I think it wasn't as egregious as he makes it out to be. It's just that the singers are probably just not that good with their vocal range. I'd pass it as forgivable compared to the other "warbles"
Mood
YES
What? How does this say 7 years ago and right next to it 3 months ago wtf
No other song says "I learned the guitar to get laid" quite like a Hallelujah cover
Wonderwall usually does the trick
Ha... best comment ever on this thread
Baby, I Love Your Way Peter Frampton
@@Quintaner imagine too, or it probably did back in the day
Nah, nah, nah, Something is THE putang magnet!
That Bono version actually angered me.
I'm sorry to do that to you :)
Tantacrul don't apologise, I need the anger to make memes
Owo its that boi
I believe Bono actually publicly apologized for that cover
Meme Lord Kmac is here, ladies and gentlement! Love your videos, m9!
This exact argument goes for every cover of "Sound of Silence" ever
Except the Disturbed one!
@@Cubby9196 Especially for the Disturbed
Everybody worships the disturbed one but i can't bear hearing it
@@Cubby9196 the Disturbed cover sucks donkey bollocks.
@@luigisali2502 And music critics say the original is the most pretentious song ever....
It goes like this: the 4th, the 5th, the 6th, and then the 4th again.
Then the the 6th then the 4th again
Baffled.
@@Musicman11389 baffled, more baffled, and then the 4th again
@@milanstevic8424 legend says he's still composing to this day
What?
Holy shit, that Bono cover version really exists and wasn't just a bad dream.
BONO oh NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Never thought I'd hear Hallelujah edited as a sexy Enigma song
i am a doughnut
Rt
@@lonewolf8667 I know this is old and all, but I couldn't agree more. Maybe if I'd never heard Cohen sing it himself I would feel differently...
Ive noticed that those *super* indie guys are obsessed with warbling. Its annoyingggg.
Compensating for a lack of an actual good voice
Theyre not “indie” theyre the type that listen to 5sos
That's why they remained indie...
It’s Mouth full of marbles, feel my pain destroy my vocal chords indie boy sound 😝
Idk what you mean but it's more up with the pop people.
Super indie guys have a knack for using electric guitars or rather accentuating string noises when using guitars instead of focusing on these warbling noises. These people that you're talking about might be self-titled indies but you can't really be indie by copying a pop trend.
I hate it when people over sing hallelujah, it’s the equivalent to over singing the happy birthday song.
Amen, I hate going to that party where there is that one person overdoing it, the song ends, and everyone just inwardly cringes
I know I can’t stand how people just sing happy birthday all the time especially around birthdays it’s almost as if the they’re singing it for someone’s birthday
@@atticusshipstone2150 They aren't talking about singing the song more than once. They are talking about the people that make the song all about them and not the subject.
oh god for real. It's like, the attention is supposed to be on the person who's birthday it is, quit trying to steal the spotlight
@@SalimReggieray
I know! Totally!!
That's usually about the time I climb up onto the table, drop my pants and lay a big steaming log right on top of the cake.
I can't stand it when people try to be the center of attention.
It’s worth remembering that Jeff Buckley’s version relies heavily on the adaption performed by former Velvet Underground member John Cale.
I didn’t know that that’s awesome
This is a critical piece of information that is criminally overlooked. Cale's performance inspired Buckley, and in doing so, it set the standard for every. single. cover. that we've heard since then. It baffles me how he's so rarely included in conversations about the song. Whenever we hear a modern cover, we're really listening to Cale's interpretation.
Not to say that Buckley didn't bring something to the table; in fact, in some respects, he even improved on it. Where Cale's vocal rings with a noble, almost regal melancholy, Buckley imbues the song with a pained, aching sadness so complete that it transcends description. Cale's solo piano is excellent and served as a wonderful basis for interpretation, but everything about Buckley's instrumentation, from the choice of guitar to the the reverb-heavy tone, fits the tune brilliantly.
Also important to note that John Cale included lyrics that Cohen would perform live but weren't in the original recorded version of the song.
Lyrics like "I used to live alone before I knew you" and "Love is not a victory march // it's a cold and it's a broken hallelujah" aren't in the original version but are included in basically every single cover of the song.
Cale actually asked Cohen to send him the lyrics after watching him perform it live and Cohen then faxed him 15 pages of lyrics.
@@AndrewMoffittJohn Cale's contribution to popular music as a whole is wildly underestimated.
Cale's version was actually the one used in the movie Shrek, but when they packaged the soundtrack for release, they substituted Buckley's.
I am glad I have found someone who shares my disdain for warble
My belief is that warblers can't actually hold a nice clean tone for even two seconds... I'd invite them to break such belief, but they are busy trying to fit a warble on every milisecond.
There’s a time and place for everything. But it’s just not necessary here. There are certain songs it works in, though I’m not a major fan of said songs
Marc Bolan is a master warbler though
I think its vibrato and yeah its overused
@@senza4591 vibrato is good. The warbling in question is melisma. If done tastefully, it's good. If not, it's tacky and somewhat boastful.
I accompanied a girl on the piano while she sang this song this year on a school show.
She sang half of it in arabic! I thought that was very cool and creative.
Oh neat!
is this a joke im missing
@@safir2241 no it's just a legitimately nice story.
alham- dillulah, alham-dillulah
@@safir2241 I hear you, it's set up like it's gonna be a joke, and then the writer goes and subverts our expectations to give us just a nice story. The bastard! How dare they play with our heads in such a manner.
My pet peeve about the song: singing it as if it were a Christmas carol.
Oh geeze, yes. Bloody Christian ignorance of the lyrics...
I love you
@@AnimeSunglasses
Personally, i think it is perfect as a Christmas song....
But then again, i do have the impression that GOD supports Atheism, because all the big and known religions has fucked things up, and is worshipping their own dogmas instead of GOD.
My Hallelujah is both broken and Holy, at the same time.
@@RubberyCat well, broken and holy at once is the thing it's written to express...
@@AnimeSunglasses
The earlier or original version is, yes.
However, several later versions, including the one Jeff covered, is more sad and broken ...
And yes, i'm referring to one of the key verses in the song, which may be different depending on which version you decide to sing.
I think the "Lets make the last Hallelujah an octave higher" mostly stems from the fact that the last hallelujah is in a very low and uncomfortable note, so for new-ish (particularly femlae) singers, this is the safest most comfortable and pretty-sounding option. It's what I used to do lmao
Wouldn't the obvious fix be to sing the entire song an octave higher, make the peak higher still and then have the last Hallelujah com back down to the original level?
@@nahuel3433 I guess it depends on your register. It's more of an instinctual decision to change the one note you can't quite reach than to change the entire song's octave if it's already comfortable for you. Even if it isn't necessarily *better*
femlae
Especially considering Cohen's baritone voice. I think most people start off singing in a register they're most naturally comfortable with in their speaking voice, and by the time they get to that point in the song, they realize it's too low for them to go naturally. It indeed does sound very amateur.
@@rambunctiousvegetable2025 That's a very gatekeep-y way to maintain the structural integrity of the song. Would you seriously tell an amateur singer to stop trying to sing hallelujah just because they're breaking the meaning of the song by doing it wrong?
I once heard someone singing Radiohead's "Creep" and she sung it with such joy! And she smiled! And she brought the whole song to a wonderful heavenly place! And...yeah.
I'M A CREEP!! :) I'M A WEIRDO!! ☺☺
That reminds me of the Postmodern Jukebox version. They made creep sexy. It's odd.
I'm pretty sure you can mash that up well with the LSD Sound system song, "All of My Friends".
Might want to check out Richard Cheese's version of Creep :)
@@hammfleis8126 You should check out Jimmy Saville's creep.
That octave jump in seven nation army, my sides are in another dimension.
I had to laugh so hard at this part ^^
That was funnier than expected even though I was expecting it.
haha I've listened to that part 4 times and it's still awesome. Might try to play it like this
@Andrew Crews Yeah, that's the technical reason, but it still doesn't sound good. They should at least raise the key to one that will actually work.
That made me laugh so hard as well
When you jumped into that girl’s cover to sing the imagined main vocal line- probably the most badass moment ever in a music analysis channel. Ice cold
Lol. Cheers!
@Sean H wasnt that Dragonforce
@@MaddesG1 Yeah, that's Herman Li playing with DragonForce.
He's a cruel man. Cruel but fair.
what cooler than being cool?
I think you're spot on about most of these (especially the warbling bit), but the opposite critique of this also true: covers of this song that just the Buckley version note-for-note are boring and lame. And even Buckley does the octave up thing in the later choruses. The take-away is that a good cover of a great song is ... hard.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it"
There are plenty of songs with great ideas but a flaw that makes them hard to appreciate as a whole. A cover is the perfect opportunity to fix these!!
What I would love to hear is a version that mixes the Cohen and Buckley versions - the verses the way Buckley does it, then build up to the big chorus like in Cohen's original.
Well I couldn't find what I wanted to hear, so I ended up doing one myself by covering Cohen's version, with a bit of a Jeff Buckley flavour in the verses.
@@All4Tanukithe whole point of a cover is to give your own spin to an existing song. Otherwise why bother.
*fetus shawn mendes singing*
commentator: “yuck”
I WAS FUCKING PISSED. But he still had a good point.
He's not THAT good honestly, like I can give him credit for not using a backing track during live performances but his studio recordings still have that fake, "glossy" feeling that can only be found in pitch correction
@@averybondeson3322 Honesty I prefer the gloss.
@@skepticmoderate5790 And that's fine, but if someone's job is to sing and they can't do that, then they're not really getting paid for talent. It would be like paying some 15 year old kid who puts pre-made drum loops over pop songs and calling him a "professional drummer". It's insulting to people who can sing well and don't get paid for it.
@@averybondeson3322 as a Singer myself he puts too much resonance in his nose. Which makes him lack projection and power and especially presence. Just ask him to Sing without any mic and you would see him struggle to get the same tonality. Hence why most vocal students do not sing pop and if and when they do they stand out
The worst thing is that tv shows are spreading the empty idea that music is all about technical ability :''(
@John Ross No, you're just looking in the wrong places or maybe it's not the genre you prefer. The American folk/ roots scene is absolutely thriving. Tyler Childers, Arlo McKinley, Lost Dog Street Band, Cody Jinks, Rainbow Girls
All incredibly talented artists but not everybody likes that kind of music. :) Cheers!
John Ross wtf we have the same name
That is my problem with most creep covers, a lot of voices are good but they miss the whole point of the song. The song isn’t meant to be pretty. It’s meant to hurtful and angry. Not soft and pretty
Isn’t pitch teeeeechnically technical ability? He’s really hatin on what people are doing with the pitch and runs and stuff but in reality people make it big because people like the sound of their voice, so runs actually help and individualize the singer, giving them their own special thing ya know
jesus christ y’all are such galaxy brains. How did you reach the universal conclusion that ‘music ended 19 years ago’? As long as it makes someone feel something, it doesnt fuckin matter
5:42 Well it goes like this, the sixth, the sixth, the major sixth and the major sixth
It's baffling how she's covering hallelujah
btw, who is this girl?
@@mdotta For research purposes, right? Her name's Holly Henry :)
@@tamircohen1512 Trust man hahaha
Great comment. There's so much dissonance it's no longer a chord but two separate chords conjoined involuntarily.
Edit: Onlay ma opunion.
My biggest pet peeve regarding covers is people who say “do you” instead of “do ya “ which is the rhyme with Hallelujah
Listen to the original by Cohen, he pronounces it as "but you don't really care for music, do you?" no ya at all
@@idontcare1898 doesn’t mean it’s the right course of action just because it’s the original. ‘do ya’ sounds better
@@idontcare1898 in the album version, it does sound like he says "do ya"
Just like teachers ruining Fuzzy Wuzzy by pronouncing “was he?” too distinctly at the end.
"HALLELUJOOOO, HALLELUJOOOOO"
the sad shrek song.
@@robertsmith4157 nah it's just a better version tbh
@@robertsmith4157 Fun-fact: though it was Wainright that appeared on the CD soundtrack, it was actually John Cale's rendition that was in the movie. It's really worth tracking down
The true sad Shrek song will always be Eels - I Need Some Sleep.
"David Liebe Hart - Hallelujah, Shrek Retold"
Yeah I prefer the John cale version for the nostalgia
Low note: **exists**
Female singer: AAAAaaaaOOHooooaAaAaA
My sister got laughed at because she can compete with baritons and lower. She's a true alto.
Ahahahhahahahahhahahaha 🤣🤣🤣it’s not their fault they just wanna shiiiiiiine and to them singing high as the heavens is how to that lmfaooo awesome comment dude
@@snowmountainlion BS But Okay 😂😂😂
@@snowmountainlion leonard cohen called from the grave, he wants to personally pay you his respects
ariel thank you channeller 🙏
that bono cover sounds like a donkey kong song
Ah yes, the U2 level from donkey kong country
DK is going to finish that level *with or without you* diddy
Bono sucks
@@TheGrumpyBowTie But Bono has a Nobel peace prize(just like that other great humanitarian Henry Kissinger)! P.S. The only Bono I recognize is Sonny.
Bono is the most over rated guy out there.
dK, dOnKey KonG-
Me: *can't even sing Jingle Bells properly*
Also me: "oh my god this cover is utter garbage what an absolute idiot lmao"
Yeah. To say a piece of music is garbage is understandable. To say: "what an idiot" is simply rude.
@@Aaackermann it was obviously just a joke bro
@@simonockas Well, good to know then, bro. Take care!
Dont need a master chef to know good food,aye?
i think mostly female singers do the octave jump thing because they cant reach the low notes, and haven't bothered/dont like to transpose it up any further
it just gets annoying to be real, but to each their own.
A huge problem with some female singers that I've worked with is that they don't bother to develop their chest voice. Like, usually they're not even that deep down in their chest voice before they jump up. With the 3 examples, I'd say the only one that sounded like she was nearing the bottom of her range was the second one but even then she still probably could have hit the notes
Women try to sing as high as possible. I don't know why, but women being able to hit high notes is considered superior than hitting lower notes. The ideal for women is being a soparano, so they always try to show how high they go.
It makes me feel ashamed sometimes as a woman who struggles with high notes but can hit low notes well. I'm in theatre communities and it's tough for us out here
pandakatiefominz exactly, I sing quite low for a young girl and people always get so shocked..
@@DogNamedWatson Personally I'm very comfortable singing primarily in my chest voice using my head voice primarily as an ornament, but my singing teacher is always telling me that I should sing higher, and almost chastising me for how low I can go in scales like I should be ashamed for hitting low range. It's not that I'm against developing my range, but this idea that it's wrong to maintain my low range is wierd.
That white stripes joke killed me
That ping at the end sounds like either the string broke or the string got unstuck from the nut while tuning.
@@orlock20 sounds like jack alright...
When Jack picks a guitar that's just a bit _too_ screwed up
Adding the reaction shot nailed the joke. This guy knows from timing.
Holy shit it was so funny
"who better than bono" a phrase never said unironically
Excuse my 10th and 12th grade English teacher from that list. She traveled to go to 3 of his concerts on the same tour. Teaches his lyrics as poetry, plays his songs in class, has posters of him, never stops talking about him, and literally has kissed the man. She “is [also] a doughnut.”
The man can sing and write tho.
With the octave higher thingy most female singers can’t reach the low notes so have to go higher.
You can change the key and still have the same effect
@Ow my Bones Or you could just let people sing what they want
@Ow my Bones or just rewrite it into a pitch you can sing.
As a defense for such behavior, it fails. If you *can't* sing it properly, don't sing it at *all*. You know it's a serious problem, if you're sitting at a bar, singing along to the jukebox, and a musician thanks you for not doing that shit. True story.
Hah, should have thought about that before being f*male
0:48 Just for anyone who didn’t know, that’s the lead guitarist of Dragon Force shredding “Through the Fire and Flames” but his strap broke
Good ole Herman Li
Archie Derham
**The MADMAN**
the song still haunts me to this day.
I think one time the guy chucked an expensive prs guitar off camera and there was a big THUNK and I almost threw up
This song broke my rockband guitar
"Subvert the whole idea of musical direction as some kind of nihilistic statement." You legend.
Modern punks sticking it to The Man.
Lol. Thanks.
I want Jack black to do a soft cover of it and I don’t know why
Good idea fam
I know exactly why you'd want that. It'd be God damn beautiful
Kiss from a rose was fucking amazing by him
I can perfectly picture it with his voice...
First he’ll do it soft.....then he’ll do it hard!
4:40 The only thing I'm qualified to criticize about this is that she sings "h[eh]llelujah" instead of "h[ah]lleluja" and I hate it.
My god yesss, it somewhat offends me when person pronounces simple words incorrectly
Or when they say the “-jah” as “yeah” and not “yuh”. Helps lower it too
That might just be her accent... I'm not sure
Alright, I clicked it. You happy now, algorithm?
Oliver stole
Reverse card
"Okay, got it. You fuck up the dynamics. That's how you cover it badly. Can I GO."
i made a bad cover of it
Dance, puppet.
Algorithm.
You can say you’re not interested in the video
But they look so sad and pretty singing it, and that's what it means to have talent, right?
Talent is a dirty word.
heinzerbrew I. A.G.R.E.E with capital letters
ZenoDovahkiin it's also important to strip on stage **cough** america's **cough** got cringe
No nigga
@divine intervention of beanos Wow I can play a song with 4 chords I'm so talented
“Did you subvert the whole idea of musical direction in some sort of nihilistic statement?” I don’t think I’ve ever laughed so hard at anything on RUclips.
Ahem... IT SUBVERTED MY EXPECTATIONS! IT BROKE NEW GROUND!
It’s as if it was sung by Rian Johnson himself
I find it wildly inappropriate to hear this song in a church. By Cohens' own words this is a totally secular song. As he wrote it the Hallelujahs are orgasms. Keep in mind this was released on his Various Positions album which is mainly about sex.
Bruh
Aw fuck yeah mate thanks for the info
Seriously, the amount of people who claim this is a religious song is really weird and displays the fact that these people have not bothered to listen to the lyrics past 'hallelujah'.
@@LilPinkFuzzyMonster THANK YOU
And don’t forget all the idiots that think this song is appropriate for Christmas 🤦🏾♀️
My huge pet peeve is when people don't match the "minor fall and the major lift" lyric to how its sung. My priorities are probably in the wrong place but God it BOTHERS me 😫
No, this is way worse than what he's worried about. I thought that was what this video was gonna be about tbh.
It's funny that people mess up on that part since that part is literally saying how the notes are.
word-paintings are commonly used in songs, but somehow singers are not aware of this concept.
also earlier in the lyrics: "It goes like this, the fourth, the fifth", as the piano notes go IV and V chords
@@Xjustlookatmex Yeah, I remember that. I was too lazy to write the whole thing lol. It sucks that people don't follow that part. Its my favorite lyric in the whole song. 😔
What about the cover waleluja?
only *actual* cultured men get this reference. *_amirite_*
The perfection of the song
Waluigia
@Mark Wehner Who made the cut? The nerd, the prude
The never was, the always nude
The ones who'd never uttered Wallelujah
It´s wanderful.
This why my cover is great...it doesn't exist yet, therefore it can't be judged because you can't get into my mind and heart my thoughts, making it the best
You underestimate my power
I swear, after I hear "Hallelujah, Hallelujah" my brain immediately tells me that the next lyrics are of course "ASSIST TROPHY, WALUIIII-IIIIIGI"
"did you just subvert musical direction as some kind of nihilistic statement?"
quality videos honestly keep em coming
Wow yeah that was actually deep.
I actually liked the harmonies (albeit the execution left something to desire).
Regarding the question: There is a whole genre dedicated to that idea. It's called minimalism.
What I'm trying to get at: It's hard to call something plain bad when there is so much up to taste. The author likes the original structure and musical statement of the original chorus, and that is fine. And he made a very good and funny video about that and I liked the video and I am glad he made it. It should just be more clear that with "badly" he meant "in a way _I_ don't like it".
But then, I bet some of those covers he showed have millions of views, so maybe that is clear from the beginning and I am just being a jerk. Whatever, have a nice day.
Badly actually means badly though. Something is a good cover of it if it is similar in quality and intention and production to the original. It is possible to make something which sounds nice, but isn't a good cover because it doesn't follow the song it purports to cover. Just because something is pleasant doesn't mean it is named properly.
@@Roescoe
Out of curiousity, would you consider this a bad cover, then?
ruclips.net/video/hcdZLTn8LD4/видео.html
Because while it follows the original to the measure and even the instruments are the same, it certainly has a different production and intention. (Sorry, I could not resist :))
Sadly I don't know the song that you've linked so it'd take me a while to get the intention or atmosphere of the song. I only could rate the Hallelujah covers because I knew the song well enough.
Song: exists
Pop singer: *it’s warbling time*
The Waluigi cover is the best version
The WHAT
Wahhhluigiiiiii Wahhhhluiiiigiiii Wahhhhluigiiiii Wahluiiiiiiiiiiiigiiiiiiiii
When you know about Leonard Cohen and his poetry, these (lame-in-comparison) interpretations lack Cohen's emotional depth and clarity. He truly was the baffled king composing Hallelujah. Everyone else just wants to sound deep. (Well, if you compare the covers to the original song.)
Has no one ever heard Jeff Buckley doing this live? Because he most certainly does not follow this “rule” live. He sometimes goes up an octave, sometimes holds a note to skip lyrics, just changes it up. But in the fact that he always does it with real powerful emotion in his voice everything he does in the song always seems to work fantastically well and fit the song. This video seems to basically ask that all covers of the song change nothing about it, which would make all covers very boring
I don't ask that everyone cover the song without changes. I ask that people observe the meaning of the song and how that meaning is represented in it's melody. You could take this and go wild with it as long as you're thinking about the meaning of what you're doing.
You can't use present tense when talking about Jeff Buckley
Tantacrul ahh thanks for the clarification!
Mabrur Hrivu Mabrur Hrivu in this case I most certainly can. The footage and recordings of him live all still exist. There is no problem talking about someone who is dead in the present tense if you are perceiving them in some format. From your understanding of the tenses you seem to want people to say “ that recording was so good” when listening to a song instead of “that recording is so good” because of the fact that it was recorded in the past. Recordings live on and can remain in the present tense. I have quite obviously assumed the premise that people know he is dead and that therefore I am talking about recordings of him.
yeah but he knows about this music stuff and says things with words that sound nice and with a smug voice I think he is 100% right
Sorry but covering "Hallelujah" is punished by the death penalty since 2004.
Look up TheDooo’s version and get back to me. Don’t look at it in regards of what this guy said (who has good points but forgets covers shouldn’t be “copies”), just see if it’s actually “good”
Or wonderwall...
What about the Waluigi cover?
@@gliscorpropagandaaccount1764 waleluja
Uh, no. Some great singers can do it.
I need a source for the animated baby shredding a guitar at 7:01
The real takeaway here. A goldmine of meme potential.
@@Srewtheshadow I found it by searching "baby guitar" :p
ruclips.net/video/qGLk1GTg5Ns/видео.html
@@stigafan You're a genius
Zabutom - zeta force is the song. I like the dubmood cover
Thank you for this. People seem to be afraid of simplicity and that fear is rarely so well demonstrated as in the covers to this song.
I blame music competitions on TV. They give the impression that it's never enough to sing a song simply and well. You have to do all the vocal gymnastics you possibly can to be noticed. Otherwise you're "generic" and "boring".
This is one of my favorite songs, and I’ve listened to as many covers as I can, and honestly the biggest problem a lot of amateur artists fall into when covering this song is that they don’t actually understand what the song is about. There’s a story about how when Leonard Cohen was writing this song he wrote over 100 different versions of the verses, and a lot of covers will use a different amount of the verses in the song. The song is meant to be interpretable and different to whomever is presenting it. But the main piece of the songs premise is meant to remain intact, the irony. Too many people don’t understand that Hallelujah here isn’t used in a literal sense of praise. It’s juxtaposed with feelings of guilt, loss, manipulation, and conformity. The speaker’s Hallelujah is forced from him at first. In this way the religious imagery within the song is meant to serve as a contrast to the idea you’re presenting, some bittersweetness. Whether it is a love for life but alienation in Leonard’s version, or a celebration of sexuality contrasted with repression, the Hallelujah represent some kind of denial or deference, and coming to terms with learning that it is okay to have that which you’ve been denied. So when people sing the in a way that is overly performative, the entire theme is lost, because the song loses its dynamic appeal, and cathartic release.
Who sings it best?
Haha, lol, that reminds me of the time, back when I still went to church, a group of girls planned to sing this during service.
But before they actually did, another church-lady (my mom) took a closer look at the lyrics and adviced them not to.
I think this video should be a required watch for all musicians ever. Not just Hallelujah cover people, not just singers, all musicians. If you are doing interpretation of whatever kind, always look at the music itself and bring out what is in it and what characterizes iit, rather than doing random stuff with it in order to promote your own "individuality". If done properly, there is still enough space for that in every piece without butchering it first.
Hallelu...
uuuu...
... *"ouya"*
Ah yes, my favorite defunct video game console. Maybe they chose to reference it as a metaphor for their interpretation of the song?
@@danielbelkin4652 finally someone got it! It's pretty much a metaphor for failure
Jesse Roel Is that a fan of Sorrow TV I see
Never forget
*_my god._*
"Not in front of the baby, look at him, he doesn't like it."
*_baby starts playing Zeta Force on guitar_*
Baby looked like he straight up shit himself.
"No, not in front of the baby"
The baby's face just killed me. 😂😂😂
Hey everyone - so, I thought (in April 2022), that I'd add a little editors note about this video, since it keeps getting a resurgence of activity every few months.
Although I don't completely disown this video... I am unhappy with how poorly I communicated a few ideas. This was only my second video and I had less than 100 subscribers when I made it. At this point, I hadn't yet developed a decent sense of how to express ideas without inadvertently communicating additional ideas I don't believe in. As a result, a lot of people have come away from this video thinking that my point was something like: "there is only one way to play this song", which I don't believe at all. I don't actually even really like this song, by the way :)
However, I can't possibly fault anyone for thinking that my point was "there is only one way to play this song", since I communicated my ideas quite imprecisely. What I was *actually* trying to say was that what I consider to be 'good' covers (like those by John Cale and Jeff Buckley) are those where the artist gave thought to musical structure - both of the original work and their interpretation and made a conscious choice to make alterations to it. They knew what they were changing and why.
Conversely, what I consider to be 'bad' covers are often the result of a lack of this kind of deep attention. As a result, 'bad' covers often fall back on default performance behaviours (like going a semitone below the final note and then back up), producing an interpretation that sounds less effective. There are a couple of throwaway lines at the end where I try to 'cover' this point without getting bogged down by it. As a result, the point is never really made.
If I was to make this video today, I would have compared what I consider to be both good and bad covers. I'd find 'good' covers that are really weird just to show how far an interpretation can go. I would also only feature musicians who are either famous (like Sean Mendes, the second example and Bono) or who have a very large following (like many of the rest but not all). I would also have spent a lot more time digging into the whole song and not just a single phrase. Again, never in my wildest dreams did I think this video would one day have well over 1M views. Lesson learned.
I do still like one thing about this video though: it was when I first realised that I could talk about music in a fun, energetic way that included lots of jokes and silliness. To some extent, I found my voice here.
ruclips.net/video/x6rNtBBspdo/видео.html In my opinion this is the best cover of the song. But that's just one mans opinion.
A whole video and no mention of Imogen Heap
You made a 10-minute video of a pretentious snob bashing on other artists. If this is the focus of your videos, feel free to have a much, much larger gap between posting. Or perhaps add to the art world instead of trying to make yourself feel better by bringing others down.
Hey Tantacrul, you've earned a new subscriber with this video. I am jelous of your ability to turn on a camera and talk about the sorts of musical points I want to talk about. Would you consider making a similar video to this, but for the US' National Anthem?
Please keep making videos! ❤
@@jordancyphers Aren't you trying to make yourself feel better by bringing him down with this comment?
I agreed with this video entirely, and I have to say it is you who comes off as a 'snob'.
5:12 "Look how they massacred my boy"
Alejandro Reyes She butchered it to hell.
7:01 that's him now
"Wow, she can go between 1000 and one notes in a second! That's a win! Wait, what? It sounds horrible? Naaaaah that's true talent!"
It's shit like this that allowed Fergie to do that shit with the Star Spangled Banner lmoa
I once listened to an old street busker who had a great raspy voice but when he covered Barbra Streisand's "Woman In Love" there was one chord he kept messing up, so I walked up to him and explained what the proper chord was, and he ended up telling me his life story in between songs. A very nice memory tied to a "bad" cover version.
6:31* the Seven Nation Army reference is all this really needed as an explanation* 😂😂😂
(Appreciate all the time you put in for this video)
I want a full version of that just to mess with people. It's hilarious
5:02 "Let me just jump in. ...... Yeah that's better." Damn. Yes, it really was a lot better. You and her mixed perfectly. Well done :)
The Cohen version is used in Watchmen because it takes place in (an alternate version of) the 80's. Buckley hadn't yet recorded his version.
The Cohen version is used in Watchmen because it's better
@@zachwilhite1294 agreed
I haven’t seen the movie but is it playing in the scene? As in do the characters put in on, if not then there’s no reason why they should pick that version over the one that inarguably fits the tone of the scene better. Regardless of your opinion on the quality of Buckley’s version it fits better with that scene by nature.
Elliott Watt since it isn’t chronological to the time frame and you haven’t watched the movie I’d say that you have 0 basis for an opinion. “Inarguably” isn’t a word that fits here either -
Jhon Baker well no it is, because I’m right, tonally Buckley’s version fits better with the scene because it was his intent when performing it, and that comes across in the performance. Just because I haven’t seen the movie doesn’t mean I’m not allowed an opinion, just in the same way that you may have that doesn’t mean you’re right. You may want to hop off your high horse before you find yourself thrown.
I would say that the singers get caught up in the word, "Hallelujah" and it's religious meaning and feel like they can "let the spirit guide them" with the phrasing ; as long as it's sung from the "soul", it's valid.
It's the American Idol/The Voice disease; singers aren't interested in creating a deep relationship with the lyrics and singing from that place. They're concerned with making it sound superficially pleasing. And somehow they all end up sounding breathy and throaty and vapid and ultimately boring, the worst musical sin of all.
Exactly!!! I've noticed that a lot of these "great" singers end up sounding the same regardless of technical skills and it becomes boring and lame.
I've never been too keen on it. It sounds like they have carrots shoved up their noses and sounds a bit pretentious. They've got chops, but it ain't for me
Is that Rich?
@@pizzatime1978 You bet your juicy Shaq meat it is.
does it make you angry that most people apparently disagree with you? It sounds like you have a bad case of "I'm smarter than most people, and pop is for most people, so I'm smarter than pop music too"
I think this is more of a critique of the annoying type of singing that has been rampant since 2013 or so. I'm not sure how to describe it other than the singer sounds like he or she is afraid of vowels. Basically the entire song "Let Her Go." Just shoot me.
@cosmic subliminals i think there's a difference between vibrato and overdoing it
If you are referring to the stupid indie sound, like Billie Ellish uses
@@alexanovamueller7737 Jesus fuck that's the sound I'm thinking of to a T. What's worse is I think I can smell her through my phone screen
@cosmic subliminals WhAtS WroNg WiTh bilLiE SheS YoUnG REEEEEEEEEE
Bang.
I think the octave changes probably come from them not being able to go low enough
Agreed, kind of a dick move to criticise that when some people’s voices aren’t capable of going that low
No one can go as low as Cohen. You can sometimes hear him struggling to reach up to a note that most of is struggle to reach down to. Had he lived he would have ended up doing vocals that you only felt in your bones and that aggravated whales. God Cohen was good!
@@miguelchavarin7056 I mean you have a point but there's more to it than that. Singers sing in certain keys because it feels natural or right to them, and if they sing it in a different key to accommodate lower notes, the rest of it can sometimes feel wrong, if that makes any sense. I personally don't have a problem with octave jumps as long as they're meant to add to the intensity of the song. So like for Hallelujah, it's annoying when they do it every time, but if they do it once or twice during the climax of the song there's nothing wrong with that
@@benshone7703 It's a legitimate criticism. They should either sing up an octave all the way so they can reach down, or play it in a different key so that they can. And from the looks of the clips the video showed it definitely didn't look like they would have had too much trouble anyway.
Yup. Some of them have a range that probably could cover it but a lot of women don't develop their lowest notes properly. I can do it because I sing mostly in my chest voice but my sister, who technically has the same range, can barely get the notes out because she's used to singing high and her breath control isn't great
I love how “a short video to tide people over” turned into his second most viewed video and an absolute gem
The first time I ever heard this song was in shrek
Dr. Disco oh yeah yeah
Same and its the best way to do it
It's also the best version
Dr. Disco and it’s my favorite
Oh yeah yeah
Shrek's version will always be the best version to me.
That's actually the original, John Cale's version
alexander estrada uhhhhh the original was Leonard Cohens
@@hellcat2449 This is certainly true, however, I do get what they mean even if they didn't express it with complete semantic accuracy: that Jeff Buckley was covering the John Cale version of the Leonard Cohen song.
That seven nation army caught me so off guard omfg why is that so damn funny
I feel like your criticism of “singers singing along with an imagined lead singer” isn’t necessarily a bad thing, especially with a cover. Most audiences of a cover of a well known song will probably already be hearing the original melody in their head, and harmonizing with that absent-but-implied melody is actually kinda cool in my opinion. I feel like you even mirror this sentiment in your video response to that guy (the one with permanent “Dreamworks Face”) who talked about how modern music sucks bc science-something-something.
That being said, many singers definitely do over complicate their parts in a really self indulgent way, often to the detriment of the piece. Like a drummer playing all fills and no groove.
“I’ll play it myself to avoid copyright claim” UMG DOESNT CARE.... CLAIMED AND STRIKED
The biggest problem with your argument is that Leonard Cohen's original version doesn't even follow that arc. Since his voice is so much lower than pretty much everyone else who covered it, he goes up into the chorus instead of down, making the chorus the climax instead of the comedown. When I realized that, it made me appreciate the original more than any of the covers (many of which are still wonderful in their own right). Some of the versions you shared here are pretty bad though, no doubt about it.
what if you jump down an octave instead?
If you can do that, you get extra credit for having amazing lungs.
@@Tantacrul I'll just shift the rest of the piece up the octave.
Well that's DJENT
@@MarcoChurchH exactly what i was about to write
Distort the crap out of it, pig squeal, and throw in a face melting bass line.
Musician: "Musical Theory"
That Blonde Girl: _"MONOTONIHILISM THEORY."_
Doesn't Jeff Buckley literally do the "one octave higher" thing in the last verse of his version?
I feel like Buckley's octave jump at the end of his "Hallelujah" wasn't meant to be a vocal wank like some of the examples but more of an exclamation. Like Buckley himself said "a hallelujah to the orgasm", that final part is loud and big with a soft release and comedown towards the end of it.
Not anymore
Yeah but this is the problem. This guy has oversimplified the topic and basically said "A is good and B is bad." It's really more how well A or B is done that determines whether or not it's good. Let's not forget that this is all subjective, too.
Nik Gulley
Plus he does like a 30 second long note so all is forgiven
Yeah, but he's earned it at that point. Launching yourself into the stratosphere on the first go-round robs you of anyway to go. You need the build up to have a conclusion.
Okay, RUclips. I watched it. You can leave me alone, now.
Tip for these kind of situations in future, because I myself only learnt about this a month or two ago and my YT experience has been far better since then:
If you see a video you don't want to watch (especially if it's from a channel you refuse to watch), mouse over to it and look for the three grey vertical dots, press that and from there you can click Not Interested to get YT to stop recommending you a video.
You can also select Tell Us Why after that to give YT's algorithm a specific reason, which is how you can blacklist a channel from your recommended feed or in some cases tell YT to stop recommending you videos based off another one you've watched, such as if you watch a video like this, but aren't interested in future recommendations about music.
dumb
If you watch it, now RUclips will recommend more videos like this for you. Is that what you want? You need to click the option to remove it yourself, to show that you're not interested and don't want it recommended no more.
One piece is great
"Just because you can doesn't mean you should." Pretty much sums up a lot of pop vocals.
At the other end of the spectrum, it is said Leonard Cohen's favorite cover of Hallelujah was done by K D Lang, in 2005 in Winnipeg during the Juno Awards. Cohen was in the audience. Can you imagine the guts it must have taken to sing that song in front of Leonard Cohen? And excel?
The clip of young Shawn Mendes caught me off guard .
While I do agree with some of the points you make, both as a composer and as a singer, I have a problem with you saying that the only way to do this song right is to complete the curve. Yes, that is the logical conclusion, it is also extremely standard. This song is, as you say, a milestone for every guitarist and singer, and many never get it right. That being said, there is more than one way to skin a cat, and right here is an excellent example. When covering this song, you have three choices, and only three. Stock standard, where your cover will be forgotten in minutes because you followed the exact same pattern as everyone around you, make it your own, where you put more of yourself into the song and take a small amount of liberty in the process, without that liberty being the focus, and taking the song and disregarding everything that has come before.
When I sing this song, I take the middle road, and put more emphasis on the final lines of the verse, making that the climax, rather than the first line of the chorus. This makes it different, but not too far removed that it sounds jarring. There's a reason I do this, too. I have had over 15 years of vocal training, and if I've learned anything, its that the only way you survive this industry is by standing out just enough to get noticed. Too far, and you are tossed to the wayside. Not enough, and you aren't putting any effort or soul into it. (Ask anyone who has ever attempted to go professional, they'll tell you the exact same thing.)
My original point was this: If you sing the song the exact same way every verse through, people will get bored. This is basic. You need to keep people listening, and unless you have the voice of a god, no-one will give you the time of day if you aren't being different. This is why it is so common for people to take this song, more than any other, and run with it.
yhea everyone seems to agree with the video and it just amazes me how many people forget that those are meant to be covers of the song not the original lol
@@eggboye I did like the cover from the gal at 5 minutes. Hers was actually nice.
But the others just kind of, hurt my soul?? It sounded so wrong and make me uncomfortable. They broke the melody.
Hallelujah is a difficult song to cover due to how important the structure is to the theme of the song. Its like trying to adjust the lineart of a picture when the lineart is the most important part of what makes the picture.
However if you can make a cover that is really good and has your own flair to boot? Nothing but respect.
What a load of rubbish. You're forgetting what makes the Jeff Buckley and John Cale covers of the song so memorable. It's the warbling and cheap accentuation that make the song sound stock standard.
@@CanadaWaxSolvent what a load of rubbish. You think that there is a correct and incorrect way to cover a song when the entire point of covers is to do it how you want to do it. This video is fucking bullshit elitism at its finest and you damn well know it
mick2998 12 there are 12 ways to skin a cat
I know the worst way of covering it badly
Changing the lyrics to talk about Jesus and the Bible, then spamming the hell out of it on Easter
It's about reclaiming the joyous word, hallelujah, from the sacred realm.
Yeah but it's from a Jewish perspective, not a Christian one. It's not "about" King David, it's comparing the speaker to him, how like him, the speaker was undone by his passion for a woman, and now that they've drifted apart he's left empty and aimless, and probably won't be remembered as a glorious and idealized figure like David is interpreted as in the canon. Reading Jewish commentary on the song is incredibly enlightening and made me love the song all the more.
The most common egregious edit to the song (aside from leaving out the verse about sex) is to alter the line to 'I know there's a God above', which Christian artists do either out of some desire to not blaspheme by implying doubt about their god, or out a desire to get a big cheer from the crowd when they sing it in concert...because it's certainly not for respect of the original song, the tradition it references, or even for the rest of the verse--it makes no sense in context to change the line.
@@PotatusFrye How in the world can anyone "reclaim...from the sacred realm" a word that means (and has always meant) "praise ye Jehova"? The last three letters are explicitly the shortened form of Yahweh--and this is the Hebrew, not some weird later Romance construction that's been stuck back on the word.
@@sadakotetsuwan9229 Jews confirmed being godless, eh?
How antisemetic of you, gentile.
@@sadakotetsuwan9229 judism and christianity are the same basis
I actually like the "imagined main line" version. I'm so familiar with the song that I can imagine the melody pretty strongly, so the singing does feel like an actual backing
Also, re: octave jump
"Does this sound right? [Seven Nation Army riff with the last note an octave higher]"
...Yes?
Telling on yourself pretty badly there
One of the worst ways to ruin this song is to be a child, which makes the lyrics disturbingly inappropriate.
Why
_god fucking dammit dont tell me kidz bop did it_
@@anuvette a song about a ruined marriage and alcoholism isn't the best kids song
That girl at 5:50 has a really haunting voice though 😂 it’s not the same song, but I think it’s got merit. I’d use it as background vocals for an abandoned, haunted cathedral, for instance.
Matthew Thomson do you know her channel?
@@lillystanley3222 i found her video ruclips.net/video/nrjz8tsv5xE/видео.html
Sounds like a less interesting Chelsea Wolfe - especially her first couple albums. I love Wolfe's voice over spooky heavy metal is dope. I bought her albums on the release day and got one signed. I should get back into her music, I think she's released like 3 albums that I missed.
Also she's just harmonizing its not hard even for people with bad pitch.
her voice is good, it's just that the harmony is absolutely, irredeemably horrible (not in terms of how she sings it but in terms of what notes she actually sings). If she just got somebody else who actually understands chord theory to write the harmony lines for her it'd be great
6:32 Seven nation army but whoops my finger slipped
@Some Dude Ah yike even thinking about that hurts my ear
WEEE da daaa WEEE daa da daaa
WEEE da daaa dum WEEEEE
0:11 The "memorable upgrade" was really the work of John Cale. Jeff Buckley's recording was more a cover of John Cale's version than it was a re-imagining of Leonard Cohen's song.
And am not trying to take merit and recognition from Buckley here, but trying to give some back to John Cale.
Good vid but your point at around 4:55 loses a lot of validity when Buckley himself adds variations after like the 3rd chorus or so. You can't really criticize covers for doing that when the quintessential version of that cover (and the one you're referencing) does it throughout the entire song.
A lot of people have said this and it's an unfortunate clarification that I didn't make. If you look back to the part where I show the graph, you'll notice that I say '...and you come back down for another run'. In other words, I'm talking about the early-mid parts of the song and definitely not the ending. When you know you're finishing, then you have the freedom to take it wherever. For example, the majority of the versions I show are performances of the first chorus. In terms of dramatic emphasis, that makes no sense IMO. When Buckley goes into it for time number three, he's kind of earned it :)
@@Tantacrul no arguments here with that clarification, cheers.
@@who_what Except that he shows the ending of some of the performances and still criticises them for it.
Buckley himself did not write the song.
@@Tantacrul So Jeff Buckley ruins the cover here then I pressume? ruclips.net/video/2YjbJTS5C_I/видео.htmlm27s
You should really listen to that whole cover and maybe re-evaluate why you are so hellbent on trying to enforce these rules. Jeff Buckley is all over the place in almost every chorus in this version.
Take a shot every time you hear Hallelujah.
Aaaaand... alcohol poisoning
oh god-
Bad idea
Are you being paid by the liver transplant industry?
*sigh* everyone make a constitution saving throw
Just gonna point out that Leonard Cohen's original did not follow the "correct" pattern prescribed by the creator of this video.
and that really is just the achilles heel that lets this whole video fall apart. i sat through the whole thing waiting for something more than "they didn't resolve to the tonic the same way jeff buckley did, therefore their cover is Wrong". tell me, even if this arbitrary restriction was somehow right, how would any of these cover artists possibly have known about it to follow it?
Yeah the singers dont know or care that they're offending him because they're not following his sad bitchy little youtube channel.
True, but Cohen's original is much worse than the famous covers of Buckley, Lang, Wainwright etc.
I mean at least we know you made it in as an example! Also Cohen's version is no longer the most popular nor universally recognized version of the song
@@instadash1812 So? And what are you talking about?
An enlightening and frightening examination of a song gone viral into a virus,. One thing I can surely be grateful of is witnessing JB perform the song more times than I can count. Every show offered a new opportunity to share a different version without the illustrated pitfalls. I miss him dearly.
I'll tell ya what pokes me in the eye about covers of this song, every time I hear this done:
...when they sing "do you?" instead of "do ya?"
I mean, come on, fer f*#%'s sake. IT'S SUPPOSED TO F-in' RHYME!!!!! THAT'S THE WAY COHEN WROTE IT! Seriously.
Even Cohen sings “do you” in the London version.
@@kindrarosgen7655 Link?
Ahh, you mean this one? ruclips.net/video/YrLk4vdY28Q/видео.html
Very odd. I listened to the second verse too, and he does it again with "overthrew you". I can't really imagine why, except that it's his own song, and he can subvert it's rhyme scheme any way he wants. So I'll give him a pass, obviously.
This 1000x
Everyone covers the John Cale version, not Cohen's. This includes Buckley, he is going off the Cale version. And for the billionth time, that's Cale singing in Shrek the movie, even if Rufus is on the soundtrack.
Truest comment I've read this week
Hurrah!!!! 😁
THANK YOU!!!
Can i donate to a comment?
The jeffbucky cover was probably the first song to ever make me cry.
POV: you've only just clicked this video after seeing it on our recommended for 3 years