http://myspace.com/hawthorneheights

first off, I have to give them credit for having the guts to do something different with this song. I went in thinking this wasn't gonna be as good as the original, which it wasn't, but I still think they did an alright job on it. The intro however..... "wtf?" Thats all i can think of it. Other than the intro, i think it was a decent laid back version of the song, however that does take away from the biggest reason the song was popular and good, the agressiveness and power of the vocals. I think the music end was great for the most part in the beginning i think the piano could've been held back tho.

Yeah, anywho what do you guys think of their interpretation?


EDIT: Okay so i went and watched a live perfromance of it, and i changed my mind a bit, I don't know what to think of this song cause the music is cool but it doesn't fit the lyrics...yeah...idk.

the problem with all these shitty bands doing covers of the pumpkins is that they're trying way to hard to make it "their own" song to the point where it's just ridiculous. It has none of the energy or appeal the original had, and it's difficult to listen to.

Oh god, that was horrible...

I'm not a fan of Hawthorne Heights, or any band that sounds remotely like them. I can't stand that type of music. But that's just this man's opinion; I'm not trying to rip on anyone that likes them, but I don't think many people on this site do.

Pumpkins, Nirvana, STP, Offspring... these are the bands I miss hearing on the radio a lot. Not just the old stuff, but I wish their new stuff got a lot of airplay (of course Nirvana has nothing new, though). Alternative rock... the Pumpkins are the only reason this breed of music is still alive at all... but it's on life support these days...

spaceboy90 link=topic=1600.msg26486#msg26486 date=1182131664]
the problem with all these shitty bands doing covers of the pumpkins is that they're trying way to hard to make it "their own" song to the point where it's just ridiculous. It has none of the energy or appeal the original had, and it's difficult to listen to.


agreed. that was terrible

It wasn't as bad as I thought. I don't like hawthorne heights, but at least they made it original. intro sucked though. as far as this quote

spaceboy90 link=topic=1600.msg26486#msg26486 date=1182131664]
the problem with all these shitty bands doing covers of the pumpkins is that they're trying way to hard to make it "their own" song to the point where it's just ridiculous. It has none of the energy or appeal the original had, and it's difficult to listen to.


First- just because you don't like a band doesn't make them "shitty"
I agree that they aren't even in the same league as the pumpkins, but PLEASE don't insult people for making music that you INDIVIDUALLY don't like.

Second- When people do covers of songs, despite the artist who originally performed or wrote the song, they want to make the song interesting. Otherwise the song would be just like listening to a cover band performing. by adding a piece of their personality to the song that they are performing they add another point of view to the original. Doing a song that sounds exactly like the original is pointless because it would defeat the purpose of another artist doing a DIFFERENT rendition of the song.

Sorry I just get pissed off when i see people that close their minds and look through a tunnel of selective vision. No hard feelings. I didn't really care for the song or the band so i definitely see where you are coming from.

One more thing....why didn't this get released with the other songs and i thought that the issue of Spun is already out. If not will that be added to the track list? i remember hearing that they would do the cover but thought they backed out. Also if they still posted, does that mean the deftones will do siva? That is something I def would look forward to.

that was very meh.

My poor ears.
No A for effort.

PersianBellyDancer link=topic=1600.msg26497#msg26497 date=1182139187]
My poor ears.
No A for effort.


haha, couldn't have said it better.

What in the world have they done? That was nothing more than a flaming bag a dog crap!

When a band covers a song note for note without adding any of their own character/personality it just seems like a waste of time to me, and is more dissapointing than a band that at least tries to do something new with it. There were parts of Hawthorne Heights' version that made me cringe, but other parts made me smile, and it says something good about their taste in music that they would cover a song by the greatest rock band ever, right?

My freind just told me about this this morning, wow, its even worse than i could have imagined, the intro is probably the most disturbing thing i have ever heard. And the rest of the music is so dull. There is no power. Its the second worst pumpkins cover i have heard (panics cover of tonight tonight taking the cake as the worst)

Yeah above all, their biggest mistake was the intro, what in the hell were they thinking!? I thought I was listening to a Queen cover. I'm content with the rest of the song but the band needs to be slapped for that intro.

Alienbob link=topic=1600.msg26496#msg26496 date=1182138772]
that was very meh.


That's generous...

That cover is...man there are no words

I knew it would be bad after I hear the intro, but man... the whole thing sucked... Do they realize that changing parts of songs in covers JUST TO SOUND DIFFERENT is unlistenable?

dougydarkangel link=topic=1600.msg26502#msg26502 date=1182144449]
My freind just told me about this this morning, wow, its even worse than i could have imagined, the intro is probably the most disturbing thing i have ever heard. And the rest of the music is so dull. There is no power. Its the second worst pumpkins cover i have heard (panics cover of tonight tonight taking the cake as the worst)

haha dougy i love you, you summed it up for me.
this sounds like shit.