Jimmy Buffet covered tripping billies

skilly · Unread post by **skilly** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:42 pm

Ok.... it does kinda suck.... It's a cool thing to do... but vocal-wise.... it's awful..

Brock · Unread post by **Brock** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:42 pm

mrjones wrote:
i am sam2 wrote:ok...about the vocals: no, he doesnt have the best voice so in that respect, they do suck...but with respect to the timing of them and the "melody" or whatever, it doesnt have to be exactly like dave....when hendrix did watchtower, it wasnt the same...and when dave did watchtower, it was different again, yet no one said it sucked because it wasnt the same melody/timing as dylan.

but all things considered, i thought it was cool...obviously not as good as dmb but i still liked it
the difference would be that jimmy buffet is trying to the have same melody and timing and guitar parts as dave. all hendrix did was use the the lyrics from the previous fosong.

How exactly is jimmy buffett trying to have the same timing as Dave? He's a good enough musician to be able to do that easily if he wanted to. It's clear that this is a COVER. I'm sick of people saying stupid shit like "Oh, Dave doesn't play that note the way you played it on your cover." No shit. It's a cover. If I wanted to listen to a song the way Dave Matthews plays it - I would listen to Dave Matthews play it.

mangold · Unread post by **mangold** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:51 pm

i agree brock, and im downloadin it now

edit: the timing doesnt bother me, but listening to this makes me think i could make it as a vocalist

dmbguitar718 · Unread post by **dmbguitar718** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:57 pm

i am sam2 wrote:ok...about the vocals: no, he doesnt have the best voice so in that respect, they do suck...but with respect to the timing of them and the "melody" or whatever, it doesnt have to be exactly like dave....when hendrix did watchtower, it wasnt the same...and when dave did watchtower, it was different again, yet no one said it sucked because it wasnt the same melody/timing as dylan.

but all things considered, i thought it was cool...obviously not as good as dmb but i still liked it

what do you mean "timing"? how is it different?

Coldchillin · Unread post by **Coldchillin** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 7:06 pm

It wasn't good

filmdude100cms · Unread post by **filmdude100cms** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 7:59 pm

jesus you guys, no it wasnt the quality wed get from dmb. but still another famous artist covering one thats still often played and heard of, infact prolly more famous than themselves is pretty cool. yeah the vocals were off, guess what its jimmy, he doesnt care, hes not about that. no one goes to a JB show to be wowed by his voice. its a decent cover though the vocals are messed up oh well.

i am sam2 · Unread post by **i am sam2** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 8:15 pm

dmbguitar718 wrote:
i am sam2 wrote:ok...about the vocals: no, he doesnt have the best voice so in that respect, they do suck...but with respect to the timing of them and the "melody" or whatever, it doesnt have to be exactly like dave....when hendrix did watchtower, it wasnt the same...and when dave did watchtower, it was different again, yet no one said it sucked because it wasnt the same melody/timing as dylan.

but all things considered, i thought it was cool...obviously not as good as dmb but i still liked it
what do you mean "timing"? how is it different?

i didnt mean to say that i cared about the timing...some people in some posts before mine said that the timing was off in the singing of it...i assumed that meant he sung the parts differently than dave. i noticed it a little bit but it seemed to be just like when dave spices up the lyrics hell hold one part and go quickly though another...
so they were sayin that buffet wasnt singing it exactly like dave

and thanks for backin me brock...buffet isnt trying to be exactly like dave...and just like you, if i wanted to hear a song just liek dave, id go listen to dave

Duffman · Unread post by **Duffman** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:08 pm

i liked it. i agree with sam and brock.

also, kanter, cwmcall uploaded it to the gmail account.

i-am-me · Unread post by **i-am-me** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:19 pm

damn...i thought that was pretty fucking cool.

i am sam2 · Unread post by **i am sam2** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:23 pm

i-am-me wrote:damn...i thought that was pretty fucking cool.

yeah...i thought it was especially cool to hear the drums that, essentially(although i dont know about drums that much), werent carter-style...they were...normal....

mangold · Unread post by **mangold** » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:36 pm

i loved the instrumentals... great soloing

dmfollower · Unread post by **dmfollower** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:25 am

I was soo pissed when Keller covered Tripping Billes and calls Dave a pop god, he may have turned into a pop god through time but it really seems that keller was making fun of him. Anyone agree?

i am sam2 · Unread post by **i am sam2** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:30 am

dmfollower wrote:I was soo pissed when Keller covered Tripping Billes and calls Dave a pop god, he may have turned into a pop god through time but it really seems that keller was making fun of him. Anyone agree?

and dave is not pop...pop is the backstreet boys, n sync, and destiny's child
dave is popular, but not pop (even tho pop may have come from that word)

do you have a recording of that cover?

i like tictacs · Unread post by **i like tictacs** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 9:04 am

dave is pop

whether or not you like to think that,

the dave matthews band is a pop group

czech · Unread post by **czech** » Fri Jun 17, 2005 9:16 am

whatever, Keller did one of those fucking cheesey VH1 specials on being a hippie, he is NO ONE to judge.

DMBTabs.com

Jimmy Buffet covered tripping billies

Who is online