Poll: Sound of Silence...Which Version is Better?

[RJ 17]

There's been countless cover versions of previous songs since...well...pretty much since music was a thing. "Recently"As in way back towards the beginning of this year. Disturbed put out a cover of Simon and Garfunkkel's Sound of Silence...and god damn it's amazing. So I was wondering...which version of this classic song do you think is better? There's no doubt that the original is a timeless classic, but I think Disturbed's version does a great job at capturing the spirit of the original while adding to it that "Disturbed" flavor...particularly in the later verses.

So, which do you think is the superior version? The original classic, or Disturbed's cover?

For your immediate comparison, here are both versions of the song.



Personally, I think this is one of the rare occasions where the cover is better than the original. The lead singer of Disturbed really shows off his vocal range in his version of the song...and god damn does it sound awesome.

 

[Saelune]

The original sounds more...original to me. The cover sounds like a Staind song that wants to be religious.

Plus I like the slightly creepy though not scary sounding original.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

The original gave more thought to the lyrics in the style that Simon and Garfunkel were singing.

Depending on what the words were, the style of singing enhanced the words to give them a certain weight to it.

With the Disturbed version, I'm impressed with how David's vocal range is and can show that he can actually sing, kinda. Some of those high spots were kinda out of his range. He sang it more like a rock ballad, it's fine since the musical arrangement was nicely done, but it doesn't work vocally. He just doesn't reign it in when he should and just belts it out. Nothing wrong with that since that's their interpretation, but for that particular song, it just doesn't work for me.

Disturbed's covers have been hit or miss with me, and this one is pretty okay.

I prefer the original in this regard.

 

[Zhukov]

The original.

Not even a question.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

I think it depends on what sort of tone you're after or in the case of using it on a soundtrack, what scene you're trying to compliment.

Watchmen rather memorably used the original for the Comedian's funeral and matched perfectly with the dreary visuals and melancholy mood of the whole thing because I don't remember the aisles being packed for that.

The cover version would better suit a rage against the heavens sort of affair, like that scene of Zuko screaming for the lightning to strike him atop that mountain in an episode of Avatar the Last Airbender because it's angry: the tone of it that of someone who is just pissed off at life.

 

[Wintermute_v1legacy]

Original all the way.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

The Disturbed cover is their worst cover ever. The dude can't sing, like, at all. They probably should have thought of that when covering such a vocal heavy song

I do think their cover of Land of Confusion may be better than the original, though

 

[Dizchu]

Nevermore's, because they did something completely different while Disturbed just did an overdone Hollywood version of it.

This is honestly one of my favourite covers ever because it uses the same lyrics but the music gives it a completely different context. Like Johnny Cash's cover of Nine Inch Nails' "Hurt".

 

[axlryder]

I intentionally listened to the Disturbed one first because I knew it was just going to make me want to hear the original. Cover kinda misses the point of the original without really doing anything interesting.

I do like disturbed though. I actually just saw them this last weekend at the Open Air festival. I just don't like how they pander to a much younger audience with their heavy handed lyrics, tone and videos. Unfortunately, that a lot of the rock/heavy metal scene. I'm honestly a little surprised how juvenile most of it is when I look back on it.

 

[Leg End]

I'm going to be that guy and say the Original Original beats both.
So yeah, the only thing that can beat Simon and Garfunkle, is Simon and Garfunkle.

 

[gorfias]

Nevermore's, because they did something completely different while Disturbed just did an overdone Hollywood version of it.

This is honestly one of my favourite covers ever because it uses the same lyrics but the music gives it a completely different context. Like Johnny Cash's cover of Nine Inch Nails' "Hurt".

I loved the Disturbed version. Friend said it sounded too angry and I replied, listen to the lyrics. It's an angry song about someone trying to wake people sleep walking through their lives and he is failing. Simon and Garfunkel are a bit too wimpy for its meaning. I think Disturbed does far more justice to the melody of the song than does Nevermore BUT, I played the Disturbed version for my son. He said, "this has got to get hard soon, I mean, it's Disturbed!" It never got anywhere near as hard as he expected or wanted. He wanted driving fast paced bass drums pounding. This version sounds much more like what he wants. Thanks, I'll email him a link.

 

[Nazulu]

David Draiman just doesn't have that kind of voice. Instead of sounding light with a good exercise of range, he sounds groggy when low to light beer when high, which is nowhere as elegant. And I also didn't like how he raised the tone in certain sections because it also feels unneeded and clumsy.

I do like how they tried to make it more dramatic, but the orchestra and acoustic guitar clash really poorly. One being epic and loud while the other sounds soothing, it doesn't work for me.

Disturbed sounds best when they go into a frenzy like in Down with the Sickness. They need go mad more often and stop making average covers in my opinion.

 

[jklinders]

I can't pick between the 2 to be honest. Simon and Garfunkel created magic with nearly every song they did. The original is haunting with a hint of the ominous.

Disturbed's version did away with the hint and spelled it out. You could say that that misses the point but Disturbed despite their virtues doesn't really do subtle very well.

It's a matter of mood for me which I prefer.

I can't listen to that Nevermore cover. Matter of taste. I've got to be in a certain mood for music that hard and I'm rarely in that mood these days.

 

[Summerstorm]

Hm... Original.

Disturbed's "Land of Confusion", for example is better that the Genesis-one though.

It's always case-by-case with remakes, covers etc. usually the older one wins, but not always.

 

[King of Asgaard]

While I don't mind Disturbed's cover, I think it's lacking the sombreness that makes Sound of Silence so memorable. I dunno, but I feel that a singer who's shouting the lyrics is kind of missing the point somewhat. Not to mention, I associate the original with the Comedian's funeral, so it's got that going for it too.

 

[2HF]

I generally hate covers of songs I love. The cover of Boys Of Summer by The Ataris sends me into a rage. I love this cover. It's fucking amazing to my ears. I'm no audiophile, I can't talk to you about highs and lows and range, I can only speak to what I enjoy. This cover is amazeballs. The original is better.

 

[Poetic Nova]

The original, no doubt.

But then again, it is fairly rare to hear a cover that does its own thing or is faithful to the original.

Few examples of covers that I do like:
Conflict did a cover of NiN that I much prefer over the original (sue me) and Fear Factory did a cover of Cars, with Numan himself, and made 2 versions of it.

This version is the Cars cover that I prefer, though I don't think it is better than the original.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Always the original acoustic version, their first version that is. That cover isn't even remotely in the same league as the original, let alone trump it.

Disturbed's "Land of Confusion", for example is better that the Genesis-one though.

Dear God no. They made it so needlessly rage-y. Plus, Genesis has the insane clip that deserves to go with it instead of that 2edgy4me cartoon, including their ridiculous mascot thing, Disturbed made:


Like, what the fuck even.

 

[Glongpre]

Simon and Garfunkel is way better. This is a tough song to cover though, because S&G give it such a unique sound that anything else seems wrong.

To be honest, most covers do not sound as good as the original (with some exceptions like Hurt, and All along the Watchtower). Maybe it is because the original artists can convey the emotion and meaning behind it better, due to a better understanding of the song. Though Nine Inch Nails Hurt is not bad, I think Cash just nailed the emotion.