Cover Songs

For this discussion of cover songs, I will be using Edith Piaf's classic song "La Vie en Rose" and a cover version by Louis Armstrong as my examples.









Edith Piaf


Louis Armstrong


Edith Piaf (subject of the Oscar-winning biopic of the same name as this song) first released her version of the song in 1946, and it became her signature tune. Both her and Armstrong’s versions have been featured in a variety of movies and other media. While the basic melody and feel of the song remain the same, the Armstrong version is a very different take on the classic.

The most noticeable difference is the lyrics. Obviously, Piaf sings in French and Armstrong sings in English. The English lyrics are not a direct translation, but were written at a later time since the song was so popular. I don’t know French, but by comparing the literal translations available online with the adapted lyrics, I think they maintain the same ideas of romanticism. “La vie en rose” means “life in pink,” or as we say, “seeing through rose-colored glasses.” The singer expresses that the object of their affection makes them see life in a brighter, more positive way. The sentimental vibe of “La Vie En Rose” makes it a popular choice for romantic scenes in films—the Louis Armstrong version is used in Wall-E when Wall-E tries to win Eve’s affections.

The two versions of this song have quite different organization. The original takes a pretty straightforward approach with the structure: a short introduction of the melody by the orchestra instruments, then alternating verses and choruses until the end and another short instrumental outro. The Armstrong version uses this structure, throwing out verses altogether: a long piano intro, with no use of the main melody, then the chorus played on trumpet, then the chorus sung by Louis, the piano part repeated, a vocal chorus, the trumpet chorus (slower, and with a key change), and the typical full-band “jazzy” ending. It wasn’t until I thought about this in depth that I noticed the cover version completely does away with the verses. I think it still succeeds in creating a dynamic mood, though (the song still builds tension and then provides release).

Louis Armstrong takes Piaf’s song and seems to give it a more relaxed feel, both through structure and rhythm. By just using the main chorus throughout the song, Armstrong keeps the feel loose and consistent, rather than the start-and-stop feel of Piaf’s version (notice how she seems to slow down between each part of the song). And in both the trumpet and vocal renditions of the chorus, he brings a jazz-influenced touch to the main melody, making it more irregular as opposed to rhythmic and straightforward. The singing and playing is not always right on the beat. Piaf plays more with rhythm a bit, but more with speed, slowing down and starting again when she transitions from verse to chorus.

The sound quality or timbre of both songs is one of the other main differences between the original version and the cover version. It might be because the original was recorded when technology was not as good, but it sounds a little more “fuzzy” and all the sounds seem to blend together. The more traditional orchestra has a different feel than the jazz band, and Piaf’s voice and Armstrong’s voice and trumpet sound pretty different.

I love both versions of this song (and there are many other great versions out there), but I tend to like Armstrong’s cover more, just because it is easier for me to sing along and relate to the English lyrics. I also like that the sound quality is a little better, and that added piano intro is really a great addition. But by understanding how the original and cover versions compare, I can better appreciate both of them.