I bet there’s some sort of trick answer, like some old Chinese standard that’s been recorded millions of times, or maybe some piece of electronic music that’s been sampled by a million DJ’s…
For the latter, “Amen, Brother” (source of the ubiquitous “Amen break,” would certainly be a contender. Though I wouldn’t call that a “cover” so much as simply a sample. In the English speaking world, “Happy Birthday” might be an answer to the former, but the OP specified recordings, not performances. Then again, there probably are a lot of random recordings of “Happy Birthday” out there, but I somehow also don’t think of that as a “cover,” although technically it may be one, being commercially released and all. Was there a definitive “original” recording of the song?
That is to say, I don’t think of some band’s take on some sheet music from the early 1900s as being a “cover” per se, anymore than a Bach performance is a “cover.” Nor do I think of playing traditional folk songs as “covers,” either.
What’s the difference though, except time and technology? In a hundred years, The Beatles will be traditional folk music just like “Camptown Races”. Some might say they already are.
If the question were “What composer or songwriter’s work has been covered the most times,” there would be many possibilities.
But if we stick to performers who write their own material, it almost had to be the Beatles.
The Carter Family has to be a contender. Granted they recorded a lot of songs that they didn’t write, but their songs/performances have been covered by everyone from Elvis to Johnny Cash to The White Stripes.
I’m not sure, but to me, the term “cover” is a modern term and refers to commercially released recorded music. There’s something about having an actual original recording that distinguishes to me, for whatever reason. It looks like Wikipedia has a pretty comprehensive article regarding the term and how it developed and came to use which seems to go along with my feeling that “cover” refers to versions of commercially recorded music.
I’m just saying in my usage of the word and how I’ve always heard it used, I never heard anyone refer to a “Scott Joplin cover” or a “Bach cover.” I’d have to think about it longer to say exactly why, but I think that Wikipedia article probably covers it.
Just wanted to let you know that I appreciated it. Well done.
This is pretty much the definition I had in mind when I asked the question.
On the other hand, I don’t really have a dog in the fight; I just thought it would make for an interesting discussion. Differences of opinion regarding terms (when kept civil) can be part of what makes it interesting.
I’d vote that the reason Bach, Beethoven, or Steven Foster, or many others can’t have “cover versions” is that they were always played live. You need an original “master” as it were, to go off from. So covers can only exist in the era of recorded commercial music.
And it’s The Beatles. Yesterday alone has more covers than the entire Dylan catalog.
Damn those LA Dodgers!
You’re all wrong. Clearly these are the most covered musicians.