In the "cover tune" thread, we were talking about Beatles covers. This made me think of Joe Cocker.

Question: Why is he popular?

Hey - if you like him, then great. I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade. I just don't get it. As far as I know, the man's only done cover tunes! Has he EVER had a hit with an original song? (Okay - there's the duet with Jennifer Warrens. Is that original? If so, then it's only one song, and he didn't sing it alone!) The guy also has a very gravelly voice, which I find kind of grating, personally.

I just don't understand why he's a "star," I guess.

Did Cocker write "You Are So Beautiful"?

There's only a couple of his songs I like. The best descriptions I can think of for Cocker is that he's a "stylist" with the songs.

I look at it this way: If Joe Cocker were not famous, then John Belushi wouldn't have been able to do that brilliantly hysterical impression of him on SNL! That, to me, is reason enough to accept his popularity.

Some musicians maintain their popularity on being very good cover artists, or at least very popular cover artists. Joe Cocker is one. Rod Stewart writes some of his own stuff, but I think a majority of his work consists of covers. Three Dog Night only did covers.

I, personally, will only buy the album of someone who writes his own material.

-Comp

Until his last couple of albums of standards, Rod Stewart's stuff was mainly written by him. I have his Storyteller 4-CD set and he wrote the bulk of those hits.

Really? I remember passing up <i>Every Picture Tells A Story</i> years ago due to the number of covers (amongst other reasons), including the major hit "Reason to Believe" (but not including the major hit "Maggie May").

Looking through his discography right now, I see my memory is slightly off. He does have what I consider an unusually high number of covers per album, but that doesn't necessarily comprise the bulk of his material.

-Comp

Do you mean that literally?

That explains why you're such a huge Beatles fan, yes?

Not of <i>anyone</i> who writes his own material.

-Comp

Not a lot of love for Joe in this thread! But I'm gonna bump it anyway, with news of a CD/DVD compilation that came out today:

http://www.imwan.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=18054

I have long been of the mind that if Joe Cocker ever finishes that massive shit he always seems to be taking when he records his voice, that will be the end of his career.

Since I haven't heard anything about him for years, perhaps the wiping and flushing has finally reached its conclusion.

I'm picking that one up later this week.

Surprised you dug up this thread, as it contains admissions that certain board members bought and enjoyed ROD STEWART albums!

http://www.uncut.co.uk/news/uncut/news/10810



JOE COCKER HONOURED ON QUEEN'S BIRTHDAY LIST

Singer Joe Cocker is to receive an OBE in the Queen's 2007 Birthday Honours List for services to music on December 13.

Celebrating the award, Cocker will be playing two special concerts this month, including his first show in his hometown in thirteen years.

The concert takes place at Sheffield arena on December, the same day that Cocker will also be inducted into Sheffield's Hall Of Fame.

The singer who is one of the few artists to have appeared at both the original Woodstock festival and it's sequel in 1994, explained his joy at recieving the Queen's honour:

“I must confess I almost shed a tear upon hearing I was to be awarded an OBE for my contribution to music. Growing up in the North of post-war England, singing in pubs, such an honour seemed inconceivable. My elder brother Vic received a CBE for services to the water industry a few years back in 2000, and I’m told that having two medals in one family is quite a rarity”.

Cocker recently achieved his highest chart position in ten years with the release of his 'Hymn For My Soul' album (see thread here).

2008 will see Joe Cocker embark on a tour, visiting New Zealand, Australia and South Africa, before going to the US.

Joe Cocker will play the following two UK dates:

Sheffield, Arena (December 15)
London, Indigo2 (16)

Thanks for resurrecting this thread -- Sisko's post is pure gold.

I think there were a couple of factors that contributed to Joe's initial popularity. Let's remember how he came into making a record to begin with. It's sort of a Cinderella type story as far as having been a plumber in the UK, a working class guy who was "discovered" (i can't recall the specifics on how that came about, but thought it was by some prominent UK rocker) for his unique voice. And then remember that first LP, heavily promoted for the superstar cast of supporting musicians appearing on it (Winwood, Page, Matthew Fisher, Madeline Bell), and the fact that the cover of "With A Little Help From My Friends", regardless of what you think of his vocal abilities, certainly struck a chord with music lovers at that time. FM radio certainly loved playing it (the album) back in the day.

Personally, after "Mad Dogs and Englishmen", i admit to having lost interest, as far as actually buying anything by him. However, that release as well as the 1st LP and the 2nd ("Joe Cocker") i think still hold up now as respectable rock albums of that era. And although he never had any self-penned "hits", he co-wrote (mainly with Chris Stainton) three tracks on the first LP, as well as the b-sides for his first four singles. "Change In Louise", "Marjorine" and "Sandpaper Cadillac" from that first LP, IMHO, may not be "great", but i think they are solid and decent songs ("Sandpaper Cadillac" may in fact be "great", if only for the lead guitar work on it). The four b-sides are all decent as well (finally got to hear them as bonus tracks on the A&M remasters from some years back).

As for his subsequent hits and commercial viability, c'mon, with all of the other CRAP out there that has sold through the years (and to this day), my only question would be "why single out this guy - his music still beats the hell out of much else that has sold as well or even better?". As for his vocal style and ability, it's not for everyone, perhaps an acquired taste, say, like Dylan or Young, or {insert choice here}. Big-time Bob or Neil fans (myself included) who would tear on anyone else's vocal abilities would certainly seem to be stone-throwers within a glass house. The concept of someone making a career performing covers may have become anathema when the singer/songwriter trend of the 60's came about, but his career (NOT vocal abilities, thank you) merely followed the more traditional blueprint of Sinatra, Bennett, and so many others.

So, here's one in Joe's defense.

Yes, but at least it's authentically rendered output. Isn't it much preferrable to the later synthetic Michael Bolton stylings, or the fantastically phony trillings of the "American Idol" era plastic yodelers?

Maybe it's an age thing where one has to have to lived through the Woodstock era? The "Mad Dogs & Englishmen" tour was one of rock's great bombasts, rivaled by few others aside from "Billion Dollar Babies".

Joe's blue-eyed soul was always at least heartfelt tribute to his roots and a very sincere expression, usually much more valuable than most any other "product".

Similarly, I would much rather experience a rough Joplin performance to a perfectly poised and grandiose Celine Dion production. Which is more touching to you? Even when her output was unpleasant, I would choose Joplin every time....

I'm suprised Joe is not more loved in this music community....there is a big audience for him in Detroit. He can still put on a good concert.

It leans more towards brown than gold.