Options
The X Factor song is a cover from this year?!
floopy123
Posts: 6,003 Forum Member
✭
Biffy Clyro - Many Of Horror reached number 20 Jan 2010.
This year! Couldn't Cowell have found an older song? Or, shock horror, perhaps a NEW SONG?
:rolleyes:
Why are they always covers?
This year! Couldn't Cowell have found an older song? Or, shock horror, perhaps a NEW SONG?
:rolleyes:
Why are they always covers?
0
Comments
Hardly anyone had heard of it .. because it was put out by Biffy .....Now they have heard it because Matt Cardle chose to sing it.
This song deserves to be heard
Biffy probably weren't even asked or informed this was going to happen.
I'd imagine the main reason is cost, but another reason is time. Writing a song really quickly can produce poor results.
I hate how lazy and superficial X-Factor covers are. I mean this song was written with Simon's (the lead singer of Biffy) family in mind. "Heroes" by David Bowie was nothing to do with heroes in the sense they think it was.
All that waffle avoids the fact that Matt has recorded a song which was likely to go unnoticed and brought it to public attention . People write songs so that others may hear them This song is now getting a huge chance to be heard again ..Matt's giving the song the same chance that XFactor gave him...and for my part I'm delighted with the results on both scores
PS Unlike many I already had the original:D but then again I like to keep my ears open to possibility:D
and pps the group come from just a few miles up the road from me ..so I've known them for a long time ..before they were biffy indeed:D
http://www.undercover.fm/news/13086-exclusive-biffy-clyro-talk-about-their-x-factor-winning-song
Biffy Clyro brothers, bassist James Johnson and drummer Ben Johnston, spoke to Undercover about the winning cover.
They admitted that X-Factor svengali Simon Cowell must have discovered the song.
“Britain’s a small place,” Ben chuckled, “Everybody knows everybody, certainly in something like the music industry. He said it was a great song and [Cardle] should use it.”
When asked what they thought of Cardle’s version, the brothers laughed, before Ben clarified, “It is an X-Factor version of the song.”
They described the online jousting between Biffy Clyro and X-Factor fans as “funny”.
“The whole thing’s a bit surreal, we think it’s all quite funny,” Ben admitted.
In a roundabout way, Biffy Clyro may end up with a UK Christmas number one single, which James described as “weird”.
“Because we’ve been over here we haven’t talked to anybody back home, really,” James continued, “This is the first time we’ve talked about it.”
Biffy Clyro fans have begun a campaign to get the original back into the chart, to counter Cardle’s version, which is almost certain to be the number one single next week.
Cardle’s ‘When We Collide’ is currently at number one on the UK iTunes chart, and Biffy Clyro’s ‘Many Of Horror’ is at number six.
Honestly, if they cover an old song that's wrong... if they cover a newer song (Many of Horror is a year old nearly now so it's not exactly new) that's wrong, and if they'd released a new one, it would be ****.
Whinge whinge whinge.
Many of Horror (When We Collide) whatever they're calling it is a beautiful song. Matt does it justice IMO. Maybe it's not a patch on the original, but I love both versions and think the whole "X has murdered my favourite song" and "X has ruined a classic" is pathetic. If you don't like it, don't listen to it. Matt's changed hardly anything about the original, just sings it. And it's beautiful.
Probably so that it can't be accused of not being "current".
It would have simply been one song on the list of winner's single options he would have been given by the show when they gave the last 5 their options.
It's a good song. Hardly anything to shout from the rooftops about. The cover lacks the soul and spirit of the original.
Hardly anyone had heard it? It got a lot of airplay from early January and for months after that. Long after it had left the charts. It was still being played when Biffy Clyro had Bubbles out. I wonder if your comment is sadly indicative of the type of people who voted for Matt. Out of touch, non-followers of current music.
I find this difficult to believe as you seem totally unaware of how much the song was heard before Matt's massacre of it.
The only permission that would have to be sought is that of the owners to the rights. Often these are the writer/s and composer/s but not always.
Funny? It's hilarious. I can't believe what I've been reading around the net over the last few days.
Anyway, if's not X Factor fans as they say, it's Matt's supporters.
Thank you. Though you don't like it, you prove the point I was making about the song being heard more than enough. Local radio stations bashed it out often too.
You reminded me of when I was in school and a girl was singing a three month old song and another one told her that was out of date now :rolleyes:
You think that's a good thing? From singer/songwriter/arranger/innovator Matt?
I thought Matt's live version was more raw and still prefer it. XFactor are bu**ers for loud backing tracks aren;t they ..I've not listened until this year:eek:
The only permission that would have to be sought is that of the owners to the rights. Often these are the writer/s and composer/s but not always.[/QUOTE]
Since song had already been commercially released, a license would have automatically been issued on request for the cover. However, the use of an alternate title would have been agreed specifically by the publisher, in this case Warner Chappell.
I thought you did need permission? Because royalties have to be agreed. Unless you're saying the didn't need the band's permission...because Biffy's record company own the rights? But even so you'd expect a good record company to at least run it past the band right?
Didn't the Verve use a tiny excerpt of a stones song in bitter sweet symphony and the stones got 100pc of the royalties? Because that's what they as a band do...ie you can use stuff but they'll get all the money from any resulting song. PS. I may be wrong about all of that
As to your second point I totally agree. Reminded me of Reagan using Springsteen's 'Born in the USA' for his 1984 re-election campaign. A rightwing lunatic using an a famously anti-american song because of the assumption that it was a patriotic song based on the title/chorus.
NB. Just seen that others have added some stuff on the rights issue while I was posting.
Biffy's publishers would have given the permission for the aspects that would have been necessary, such as the change of title.
Depending on the terms of the contracts (though there are now industry standards) the publishers get a share of the royalties, the writers get a share and so on. Matt will get performer's royalties for this version.
I'm not sure about the Stones (or Jagger and Richards) getting 100% of the royalties from the Verve song. They would have likely got a significant percentage but I doubt any band would have agreed to 100% (unless the agreement was being negotiated by Chris from The Apprentice
In the case of a beautiful, treasured track, yes I do think it's a good thing. If you take a terrible song and make it amazing, that's the sign of a great singer/songwriter. Many of Horror was perfect as it was, so why change it?
(Mechanical) royalties are based on a statutory tariff, calculated on the dealer price of the product, so no negotiation or agreement is necessary. "Mechanicals" are the income derived from the sale of a "mechanical" device, ie a cd, now also encompassing digital sales.
Performance royalties from airplay, live shows etc. will go to the publisher/writer. However, Matt will get a share of PPL, which is the royalty paid on use of a master recording, ie nothing to do with the actual song. (assuming Syco artists get PPL!............)
BITTER SWEET SYMPHONY was the subject of a law suit by Andrew Loog Oldham. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Sweet_Symphony
I heard Matt saying in an interview it was suggested to him by Richard Stannard.
I think it was a great idea. It's music that Matt likes, an underrated song by a group who now get's more credit for doing it.
Just looked...the stones did get 100pc AND the songwriting credits! But is a bit more complicated than that...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Sweet_Symphony
Maybe the Verve were represented by Stuart Baggs The Brand when he wasn't flogging yo yos
Oops someone's already posted that link, i really should refresh more
The actual cover doesn't annoy me.
This sort of post really bloody annoys me. The album Many of horror went platinum (as did the album before, selling over 300,000 copies), and I think reached 8 in the album charts (there last album charted at 3.
The Album, only revolutions, has so far produced 4 top 20 singles.
Add that to another 3 albums, a best of compilation, and oodles of festivals, gigs and an arena support slot with muse, I think we can agree that Biffy are hardly obscure.
All of this.
It's as if anything outside the mainstream is obscure on this forum sometimes. And I would actually call Biffy pretty mainstream at this point in their career, success wise anyway.
Surprises me, because most of my friends watch XF but are also into other music. I'd be interested to know the split on this forum between those who watch for entertainment and would never in a million years buy the music, and those who genuinely regard it as a producer of decent music. I'm not saying one is better than the other...just interested.
No, Biffy are not obscure. Even I'd heard of them and I openly have generally terrible taste in music. I just hadn't heard Many of Horror and many others I know hadn't either, What fault of that is ours, if we just hadn't crossed its path?
They come from just up the road from me for God's sake ...lots and lots of people hadn't heard that track ..people live in bubbles and play playstations and don't hear music. I fisrt heard the band when they were much more aka Nirvana and called themselves screwfish ..that was before they went to the smoke to educate themselves in mid 90's.
Lots and lots of people don't hear music. For instance you wouldn't believe how many people haven't heard Mozart's 39th 40th and 41st symphonies ..and they aren't even new tracks:eek: and Mozart isn't obscure
And of course the fact that so many people knew the track will be one reason why it is higher in the charts now than it was first time round
Of course its not your fault you hadn't heard it
Its just that saying things like,
"Hardly anyone had heard of it .. because it was put out by Biffy"
Is, pretty disprespectful, and, well untrue. As other posters have pointed out Biffy are a long way from the obscure unsigned act that some of the posters here seem to be portraying them as.
They are probably one of the most well known modern Brittish rock acts on the go, they were shortlisted for the mercury prize this year.
I just think people are equating "I haven't heard of them", with "no one has heard of them", when they are actually a quite well established mainstream rock act and have been since the release of puzzle.
Quite a lot of people have heard of Biffy.
If you're not going to bother to put anything of yourself into it or you think the song is fine as it is, isn't it best to leave well alone?