Why has no-one had a big hit with a Moz/Smiths Song?

[Benton]

I know there's been umpteen cover versions by all sorts, but, with such a huge back catalogue, why has an established artist not released one of his songs. What's the highest UK chart placing for a Moz cover? Is it Dream Academy?

 

[Worm]

The highest chart placing would have to be Tatu's "How Soon Is Now?", I think. Did Dream Academy even release their cover as a single?

From time to time I wonder why no one can successfully cover The Smiths, but the answer is always just the boring, obvious, expected one: other bands can't recreate the magic of The Smiths. Marr's densely-textured guitar tracks, the tight rhythm section, and Morrissey's incomparable vocal style and literate words set the bar way too high. No band has matched them-- well, except The Ukrainians. Joking aside, they really established the template, which is to cover The Smiths in some offhand, ironic, almost parodic manner that pays tribute to the original track but doesn't try and one-up it. That's about all any band can do.

The best Smiths cover, for my money, is H20's "Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now". But don't bother looking through old copies of Billboard to find that one.

 

[Danny]

I think it's because the songs aren't bland enough

I've wondered about this a bit and I think it's because the type of artists that generally release cover versions want something safe and bland. They want a surefire hit. They don't want to take chances.

Morrissey's songs are too specific and say too much for mainstream artists.

 

[Benton]

> The highest chart placing would have to be Tatu's "How Soon Is
> Now?", I think. Did Dream Academy even release their cover as a
> single?

Tatu were set to release HSIN in the UK, but it was pulled fairly late - not sure why because they didn't replace it with anything. I thought it was rather good. Dream Academy were in the lower reaches of the UK top forty.

> From time to time I wonder why no one can successfully cover The Smiths,
> but the answer is always just the boring, obvious, expected one: other
> bands can't recreate the magic of The Smiths. Marr's densely-textured
> guitar tracks, the tight rhythm section, and Morrissey's incomparable
> vocal style and literate words set the bar way too high. No band has
> matched them-- well, except The Ukrainians. Joking aside, they really
> established the template, which is to cover The Smiths in some offhand,
> ironic, almost parodic manner that pays tribute to the original track but
> doesn't try and one-up it. That's about all any band can do.

I think those are good artistic reasons for not covering The Smiths but since when have artistic reasons been the main criteria in the industry? And I could see someone having a huge hit with, say, "Trouble Loves Me" or "Lost".

 

[Because they are all shitty covers of genius.]

 

[Some things are better left uncovered. Like most c]

 

[kinky friedman]

maybe because they're simply not good enough songs to be covered...

 

[Salt and Vinegar]

> maybe because they're simply not good enough songs to be covered...
Maybe you should have jumped in with the chips and who flung dung.