Listener-supported — Commercial-free
share
tweet
Comments (92)add comment
I like the original considerably better. This is "acceptable" but doesn't rise to "decent".
Shimmer wrote:
Tonight, featuring the dulcet tones of Axl Rose's less talented brother, Larry.
What is this, karaoke night?
Tonight, featuring the dulcet tones of Axl Rose's less talented brother, Larry.
This is horrible. Forced and noisy.
None of the grace, subtlety or evocation of the original.
None of the grace, subtlety or evocation of the original.
LOL! Not much of a "tribute."
Proclivities wrote:
Shimmer wrote:
Sort of, but not exactly; it appears to be from an album which is a tribute to "Rumours".
Proclivities wrote:
Shimmer wrote:
What is this, karaoke night?
Sort of, but not exactly; it appears to be from an album which is a tribute to "Rumours".
This version is why the PSD button was invented. It helps prevent PTSD (Post Traumatic Song Disorder) :-)
It's only good because the writing on this is so damn good.
Ah. The Crow comes to mind.....
Great find, Bill! They ain't payin' you enuff
Don't think I've seen a song on RP have quite the rating distribution. I guess that is what happens when you take a classic, considered by most to be astounding, and cover it. I thin people react to different attributes, good cover, bad cover, good song, bad song...
This is a great song, and there are covers I would put in my library and listen to. This isn't one of them.
This is a great song, and there are covers I would put in my library and listen to. This isn't one of them.
Shimmer wrote:
Sort of, but not exactly; it appears to be from an album which is a tribute to "Rumours".
What is this, karaoke night?
Sort of, but not exactly; it appears to be from an album which is a tribute to "Rumours".
I like both versions..... 10.
Like this version-a lot!
Nice surprise. First I've heard it…
Not half bad; not the same, but that's a good thing.
hempmandan wrote:
You just don't mess with perfection. Even a great cover of that song will always fall short of expectations
The idea of a cover version of a song is not necessarily to try and better the original, but hopefully to find something new in it, or to bring new people to it...in my opinion. It would be argued by many that Judy Garland's version of 'Over The Rainbow' is ‘perfection', but that hasn't stopped legions of other artists covering it and Eva Cassidy's version is the definitive rendition for many now I'm sure.
No song should be considered untouchable because that closes off the possibility of interesting interpretations, same as with any art form.
That said this song feels like a music-by-numbers version of the original and fails to get my attention in any positive way.
You just don't mess with perfection. Even a great cover of that song will always fall short of expectations
The idea of a cover version of a song is not necessarily to try and better the original, but hopefully to find something new in it, or to bring new people to it...in my opinion. It would be argued by many that Judy Garland's version of 'Over The Rainbow' is ‘perfection', but that hasn't stopped legions of other artists covering it and Eva Cassidy's version is the definitive rendition for many now I'm sure.
No song should be considered untouchable because that closes off the possibility of interesting interpretations, same as with any art form.
That said this song feels like a music-by-numbers version of the original and fails to get my attention in any positive way.
Insert snarky comment
Jelani wrote:
Agreed, I only gave it a 3 because of nostalgia... Sister Hazel's from Gainesville, where I lived happily for a while... memories...
This pretty much sucks, IMO.
Agreed, I only gave it a 3 because of nostalgia... Sister Hazel's from Gainesville, where I lived happily for a while... memories...
Wow, this is a great cover album from 1998. Will have to dust off that ol' CD.
Jelani wrote:
That says it all.
This pretty much sucks, IMO.
That says it all.
This pretty much sucks, IMO.
Surprises me there aren't more covers of this song.
LindyLuv wrote:
You just don't mess with perfection. Even a great cover of that song will always fall short of expectations
Actually,it's a decent cover!
You just don't mess with perfection. Even a great cover of that song will always fall short of expectations
Actually,it's a decent cover!
Certain songs you just don't touch. Especially when two of them went to my daughters high school
Shimmer wrote:
lol!
What is this, karaoke night?
lol!
jjfflyboy wrote:
I can think of some that were played as much or more than Rumours:
.
.
MJ's Thriller
The Police Ghost in the Machine
Phil Collins
Nirvana Nevermind
Guns & Roses Appetite For Destruction
...and a few others.
I would never expect a cover of this song to work because it is too built in to the rock culture (was there any album played more than Rumours, ever, anywhere?)
I can think of some that were played as much or more than Rumours:
.
.
MJ's Thriller
The Police Ghost in the Machine
Phil Collins
Nirvana Nevermind
Guns & Roses Appetite For Destruction
...and a few others.
RLove wrote:
agreed...was just going to post a similar comment. Sigh. Oh well. And I like this band, too...they could have made it their own.
If an artist is going to cover a song, why try to do it exactly like it was before? Don't waste my time.
agreed...was just going to post a similar comment. Sigh. Oh well. And I like this band, too...they could have made it their own.
If an artist is going to cover a song, why try to do it exactly like it was before? Don't waste my time.
offroadbiker wrote:
I take it you're not listening today?
I'm glad I heard this rendition of Gold Dust Woman. Once was enough. 
I take it you're not listening today?
What is this, karaoke night?
I do really love how RP mixes the tunes up in order to create such a beautiful and eclectic mix. I'm glad I heard this rendition of Gold Dust Woman. Once was enough.
Man, they sure put some bite in it.
Instrumentally, I love it. The singer reminds me of an 80's hair band unfortunately....
I have never been so confident to remark on a song that I have never heard, confident that this sucks because it absolutely has to, it has no choice!
This is excruciating.
The original is hard to beat. Possibly great when covered live by any number of bands. This band, on this recording seems marginal to me.
In a phrase I'm loathe to ever utter: Hole did it better.
ddog wrote:
me too, but not quite. vg tribute to the guitar work of the original.
I thought this was Kid Rock before I came to the website.
me too, but not quite. vg tribute to the guitar work of the original.
Sounds a little like Kid Rock. Could possibly better than the original.
Great band, great cover...
I kinda like it. I would probably want to get the whole album just to hear the overall package by all the artists.
We've heard these songs so endlessly, that I think it is refreshing to hear any kind of cover version. Well, not any kind. Hopefully no silly pop divas decide to litter the airwaves with their crap rendition.
Oh nevermind, I see Jewel is on this album as well. 1998, I think this is before she turned into a annoying pop diva.
We've heard these songs so endlessly, that I think it is refreshing to hear any kind of cover version. Well, not any kind. Hopefully no silly pop divas decide to litter the airwaves with their crap rendition.
Oh nevermind, I see Jewel is on this album as well. 1998, I think this is before she turned into a annoying pop diva.
bluejay08003 wrote:
This doesn't work for me but they get points for being different, compared to, say, the well-worn no-changes cover of "Landlside" by Dixie Chicks.
Yes, at least they put their own touch on this, but I never really cared for this tune very much anyhow.
This doesn't work for me but they get points for being different, compared to, say, the well-worn no-changes cover of "Landlside" by Dixie Chicks.
Yes, at least they put their own touch on this, but I never really cared for this tune very much anyhow.
almost sounded like Stephen Tyler of Aerosmith...
ddog wrote:
ddog wrote:
I thought this was Kid Rock before I came to the website.
I think I may like this better than that mad woman warbling.
This brings nothing new to this song. Had they, perhaps, changed the tempo, slowed it down, they might have made it their own. But no, that didn't happen.
2.
2.
Love the original, as Fleetwood Macophile, this version does not hurt at all.
I thought this was Kid Rock before I came to the website.
Yuck!
This is a VERY poor rendition. No need for this again...
ezzyme wrote:
I was in another room for most of this song but even right next to the computer's speakers he sounds a lot closer to John Mellencamp. I think Steven would be a lot more swoopy and histrionic with this song. He don't do subtle.
Nice instrumental rendition but singer's voice sounds like Steven Tyler as compared to the original with Stevie Nicks. Really sad.
I was in another room for most of this song but even right next to the computer's speakers he sounds a lot closer to John Mellencamp. I think Steven would be a lot more swoopy and histrionic with this song. He don't do subtle.
This keeps making me want to hear Aerosmith do it.
Diversity, listenable.
Baby_M wrote:
This doesn't work for me but they get points for being different, compared to, say, the well-worn no-changes cover of "Landlside" by Dixie Chicks.
I'm probably in the minority here, but I like it. Not the greatest cover version ever, but they put their own spin on it while respecting the original.
This doesn't work for me but they get points for being different, compared to, say, the well-worn no-changes cover of "Landlside" by Dixie Chicks.
beats hell outa rapcrap
jjfflyboy wrote:
Play it again.
Not Nick's particular way of delivering, but worth listening to and enjoying.
Sister Hazel. Never heard of them before, but will go for a listen. I thought the delivered a good cover of this song. I would never expect a cover of this song to work because it is too built in to the rock culture (was there any album played more than Rumours, ever, anywhere?)
Wikipedia says Sister Hazel has some southern rock influences. Explains the guitar solo and vocal. I don't go much for southern rock, but I think this song flourished with it.
Play it again.
Wikipedia says Sister Hazel has some southern rock influences. Explains the guitar solo and vocal. I don't go much for southern rock, but I think this song flourished with it.
Play it again.
Play it again.
Not Nick's particular way of delivering, but worth listening to and enjoying.
Sister Hazel. Never heard of them before, but will go for a listen. I thought the delivered a good cover of this song. I would never expect a cover of this song to work because it is too built in to the rock culture (was there any album played more than Rumours, ever, anywhere?)
Wikipedia says Sister Hazel has some southern rock influences. Explains the guitar solo and vocal. I don't go much for southern rock, but I think this song flourished with it.
Play it again.
Wikipedia says Sister Hazel has some southern rock influences. Explains the guitar solo and vocal. I don't go much for southern rock, but I think this song flourished with it.
Play it again.
S-curvy wrote:
I say deposit all your sarcastic comments here rather than in the Unemployment Line, which is a better place to practice perspective by far.
Oh this is rather funny. I was working, w/ RP on in the background and this tune came on; naturally, given the greatness of FM's "Gold Dust Woman," my interest was piqued enough that I wandered over to the iPod display for a look-see. Whaddaya know, but I saw a slew of rather biting remarks about this cover version -- okay, okay, we all have our opinions, buuuuttt sometimes practicing a little perspective is a good idea, especially on RP, where covers are de rigeur and a pleasant way to stir the mental juices!
As I stepped away from the display with those harsh critiques in mind, I had 2 thoughts: A) the song stands quite well on its own -- it's a pleasure to listen to, and that's no surprise given its origin; and B) it I were to go along w/ the mob and beat my chest in distress over what an injustice this tune was to its parent tune, I was left with not much but the sad option of switching RP off in order to go tune in some "far superior" commercial radio schlock. A moment of perspective can be time very well spent. Think about it, and try tempering those comments.
This is so much easier for me to listen to than Mumbles and Sons, or Duh National....
As I stepped away from the display with those harsh critiques in mind, I had 2 thoughts: A) the song stands quite well on its own -- it's a pleasure to listen to, and that's no surprise given its origin; and B) it I were to go along w/ the mob and beat my chest in distress over what an injustice this tune was to its parent tune, I was left with not much but the sad option of switching RP off in order to go tune in some "far superior" commercial radio schlock. A moment of perspective can be time very well spent. Think about it, and try tempering those comments.
This is so much easier for me to listen to than Mumbles and Sons, or Duh National....
I say deposit all your sarcastic comments here rather than in the Unemployment Line, which is a better place to practice perspective by far.
Oh this is rather funny. I was working, w/ RP on in the background and this tune came on; naturally, given the greatness of FM's "Gold Dust Woman," my interest was piqued enough that I wandered over to the iPod display for a look-see. Whaddaya know, but I saw a slew of rather biting remarks about this cover version -- okay, okay, we all have our opinions, buuuuttt sometimes practicing a little perspective is a good idea, especially on RP, where covers are de rigeur and a pleasant way to stir the mental juices!
As I stepped away from the display with those harsh critiques in mind, I had 2 thoughts: A) the song stands quite well on its own -- it's a pleasure to listen to, and that's no surprise given its origin; and B) it I were to go along w/ the mob and beat my chest in distress over what an injustice this tune was to its parent tune, I was left with not much but the sad option of switching RP off in order to go tune in some "far superior" commercial radio schlock. A moment of perspective can be time very well spent. Think about it, and try tempering those comments.
This is so much easier for me to listen to than Mumbles and Sons, or Duh National....
As I stepped away from the display with those harsh critiques in mind, I had 2 thoughts: A) the song stands quite well on its own -- it's a pleasure to listen to, and that's no surprise given its origin; and B) it I were to go along w/ the mob and beat my chest in distress over what an injustice this tune was to its parent tune, I was left with not much but the sad option of switching RP off in order to go tune in some "far superior" commercial radio schlock. A moment of perspective can be time very well spent. Think about it, and try tempering those comments.
This is so much easier for me to listen to than Mumbles and Sons, or Duh National....
Nice instrumental rendition but singer's voice sounds like Steven Tyler as compared to the original with Stevie Nicks. Really sad.
Come on, it's not that bad. Hard to beat the original in this case.
Solidly not-bad. Not as great as the original, but not wildly altered either so it's pretty ok in my book.
If we're going to do covers, I prefer Hole's version, but this isn't too terrible.
This cover is not terrible, but it does not hold a Bic lighter to the original, thus it will remain unrated by me for eternity...
Thanks for making me RUN to go put on Rumours! The original is so outstanding - this cover is atrocious!
Yes, And I'd have KT Tunstall do the vocals. Wolfette wrote:
Mick Fleetwood was partly behind the idea to have the tracks on Rumours covered as a tribute album.
Everyone knows about The Corrs version of 'Dreams' (the only commercial hit from this album).
I really like this cover. I think Stevie would aprove of the direction it's taken. That sitar in the intro adds to the mysticism.
But, I will admit, it isn't nearly as dark as it could have been. If I were to cover this Classic song, I'd take a couple of elements from this (definately that sitar!), and mix it with the best of the original, the demo (that 'Rumours 2' one with the 'oohhhs & aaahhhs') & the early live versions.
Anyone else heard the Japan '77 version? 9 minutes with one hell of an ending.
Mick Fleetwood was partly behind the idea to have the tracks on Rumours covered as a tribute album.
Everyone knows about The Corrs version of 'Dreams' (the only commercial hit from this album).
I really like this cover. I think Stevie would aprove of the direction it's taken. That sitar in the intro adds to the mysticism.
But, I will admit, it isn't nearly as dark as it could have been. If I were to cover this Classic song, I'd take a couple of elements from this (definately that sitar!), and mix it with the best of the original, the demo (that 'Rumours 2' one with the 'oohhhs & aaahhhs') & the early live versions.
Anyone else heard the Japan '77 version? 9 minutes with one hell of an ending.
Decided to go back to the original....well 4mins 53secs of pure genius...
I'm probably in the minority here, but I like it. Not the greatest cover version ever, but they put their own spin on it while respecting the original.
newwavegurly wrote:
Yes, so many covers are just NOT necessary. Add this to the list. With prejudice.
I would MUCH rather hear the original.
Yes, so many covers are just NOT necessary. Add this to the list. With prejudice.
Hmmmm... nice cover, but it does not hold a candle to the original... I will leave this unrated...
loveslave wrote:Sounds a lot like Aerosmith, don't you think?
Oh, dear.
Yuck.
rmurray248 wrote:
...Totally agree - they're just riding/coattails, trying to sell albums. Awful.
Mick Fleetwood was partly behind the idea to have the tracks on Rumours covered as a tribute album.
Everyone knows about The Corrs version of 'Dreams' (the only commercial hit from this album).
I really like this cover. I think Stevie would aprove of the direction it's taken. That sitar in the intro adds to the mysticism.
But, I will admit, it isn't nearly as dark as it could have been. If I were to cover this Classic song, I'd take a couple of elements from this (definately that sitar!), and mix it with the best of the original, the demo (that 'Rumours 2' one with the 'oohhhs & aaahhhs') & the early live versions.
Anyone else heard the Japan '77 version? 9 minutes with one hell of an ending.
THE ORIGIONAL WAS SOOOOOOOOO OVER PLAYED THAT I GREW TO HATE IT, I change the station when ever it\'s on. I likeed mac once ( bare trees , but 76-77 ended that )
So why would I ever want to hear a remake.
Sort of like a remake of Plan 9 from outer space
I would MUCH rather hear the original.
Summer of 76 (or was it 77, things are hazy from back then). Hot as hell day at an outdoor rock festival in Austin, TX. with several thousand other people in various altered states.
Finally the sun goes down and the air cools. Out of the darkness from the stage comes Stevie Nicks voice singing Gold Dust woman as the spot light slowly comes up on her. Wow, what a memory. Why do these jerks want to screw that memory up! Get it off the air. 
there is no need for this version\'s existence. weak. play the original or any of 30 other FMac songs. mho anyway.
Sounds a lot like Aerosmith, don\'t you think?
Isn\'t this the band that Al Gore--Mr. Censorship--said he liked? Pointless cover.
Cheesey, but somehow I like it.
I don\'t know this band, or what else they do, but I guarantee the place goes absolutely nuts when they do this live - especially if there are spirits being served.
Hi Bill. I think you should cut this type of stuff from your playlist. If I want to hear totally bland covers, I can go down to a local bar.
Originally Posted by tawanda:
What was the point of covering this song? The guitar, bass line, everything -- exactly the same as the original except for that pointless solo. What a lame exercise this version is -- just makes me want to hear the original, with Stevie Nicks' vocals making it come to life.
...Totally agree - they're just riding/coattails, trying to sell albums. Awful.
What was the point of covering this song? The guitar, bass line, everything -- exactly the same as the original except for that pointless solo. What a lame exercise this version is -- just makes me want to hear the original, with Stevie Nicks\' vocals making it come to life.
It has lost that creepy, weird kinda atmosphere, that Stevie Nicks/Fleedwood Mac gave it. Less intimate, too. No, this ain\'t what it supposed to be, I think.
most excellent indeed! imho, this cover blows the original out of the water. so much better.
Wow, a great cover of this song.
Sister Hazel is a very good band - I just saw them live opening for BNL in Cleveland around Thanksgiving, and was impressed positively. Not just a lame pop cookie cutter act. This is a decent cover, but doesn\'t in any way eclipse the original.