[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]
Shawn Colvin — Baker Street
Album: Uncovered
Avg rating:
7

Your rating:
Total ratings: 1260









Released: 2015
Length: 4:22
Plays (last 30 days): 1
Winding your way down on Baker Street
Light in your head and dead on your feet
Well, another crazy day
You'll drink the night away
And you talk about everything
This city desert makes you feel so cold
It's got so many people, but it's got no soul
And it's taken you so long
To find out you were wrong
When you thought it held everything

You used to think that it was so easy
Always say that it was so easy
But you're trying, you're trying now
Another year and then you'll be happy
Just one more year and then you'll be happy
But you're crying, you're crying now

Way down the street there's a light in his place
And he opens the door, he's got that look on his face
And he asks you where you've been
You tell him who you've seen
And you talk about anything
He's got this dream about buying some land
He's gonna give up the booze and the one-night stands
And then he'll settle down
In some quiet little town
And forget about everything

But you know he'll always keep moving
You know he's never gonna stop moving
'Cause he's rolling, he's the rolling stone
And when you wake up, it's a new morning
The sun is shining, it's a new morning
And you're going, you're going home
Comments (58)add comment
Our version
First time hearing this. Quite a downgrade. Now the Foo Fighters did an amazing number on this song!
 timmus wrote:
Not sure about this cover.  In the Gerry Rafferty version, the powerful sax solo and the spacious sounds in the bridge sound like a mix of hangover, fear, and street energy, and it totally conveys what the song is about.  In this song it sounds empty, with the little guitar riff sounding like someone's stomach growling in the middle of the night.
 
I'm kind of confused what this song is going for.. I get the impression they're just trying to rework an old classic and hoping something interesting comes out of it.



Your comment made me think. I like the energy of the Rafferty, but this version does, for me, capture the down side. I've lived an up and a down from objectively the same experience - I need to play the original right now, but this does touch me, too...
 fredriley wrote:

A good cover adds something not in the original, an extra twist. This adds urban weltschmertz to Rafferty's upbeat song.



Yeah, a real valium rush!
Great song, lacklustre singing. 7
I love me some SC and this tune not an exception…
Not sure about this cover.  In the Gerry Rafferty version, the powerful sax solo and the spacious sounds in the bridge sound like a mix of hangover, fear, and street energy, and it totally conveys what the song is about.  In this song it sounds empty, with the little guitar riff sounding like someone's stomach growling in the middle of the night.
 
I'm kind of confused what this song is going for.. I get the impression they're just trying to rework an old classic and hoping something interesting comes out of it.
(Yet) another cover sung by someone who hasn't bothered to understand the context of the lyrics. 
 Styopa wrote:

Shite, some songs should never be covered


..and yet, this is a 9 in my book (as is the original, to me)
The great thing about RP: there's a PSD button! Enjoy!
Shite, some songs should never be covered
 memoryboxer wrote:

I've not heard this before (thanks yet again B&R!). Beautiful cover of a beautiful - if deeply sad - song. Especially sad in my mind knowing Rafferty didnt "give up the booze and the one night stands" (or at least the booze) and it ultimately killed him. I'm sure someone will step in slamming this and lamenting the lack of the glorious sax solo from the original but it doesn't actually lose strength for the absence.



Couldn’t agree with you more. This is a brave cover, which really works. And I didn’t miss the sax solo at all, much as I like the original.
 stephantroebs wrote:

Why does every cover have to be slower than the original? Why not fast and hard?



This lullaby version is putting me to sleep  -- terrible cover without regard to the guitar melodies of the original. Would like to hear a Red Hot Chili Peppers version or similar rock band with prominent guitar player.
 fredriley wrote:

A good cover adds something not in the original, an extra twist. This adds urban weltschmertz to Rafferty's upbeat song.


Never heard that term before:
"Weltschmerz is a term coined by the German author Jean Paul in his 1827 novel Selina, and denotes the kind of feeling experienced by someone who believes that physical reality can never satisfy the demands of the mind."
 bam23 wrote:
 Wonderloaf wrote:


agreed

the heroin version 


For those who are not familiar with heroin, what is it about this performance that elicits this statement? Mazzy Star gets this comment also. But why? Slow? There are plenty of performances that are slow. I really don't understand. But this claim is made as if it's obvious to everyone.
 

Indeed.  Some of my favorite music was made by actual heroin addicts and I would not call their music slow as a rule.

Clapton and Aerosmith to name just two off of the top of my head.  There are many others and their music as a whole is usually pretty intense.
 stephantroebs wrote:

Why does every cover have to be slower than the original? Why not fast and hard?



So many things I could say to this!
good god these fucking whiners… beautiful song re-interpreted by SC brilliantly
No. Just no.
This has completely eliminated any atmosphere(which there was/is a lot of)that the original had. I find this plodding and uninspiring.

Why does every cover have to be slower than the original? Why not fast and hard?

 Wonderloaf wrote:


agreed

the heroin version 


For those who are not familiar with heroin, what is it about this performance that elicits this statement? Mazzy Star gets this comment also. But why? Slow? There are plenty of performances that are slow. I really don't understand. But this claim is made as if it's obvious to everyone.
Busy working, but heard those opening guitar strokes and my brain said "Shawn Colvin."  Looked up and yes. 
Really, enough of the not very good Shawn Colvin covers of other people's hits.
 phlattop wrote:



funny, I never thought of this as a song about London. But as a dumb 14 yr old in the US when the original came out, it reminded me of the West Coast. Something about that great sax solo, I think. Of course, Gerry Mulligan was from Scotland

Gerry Mulligan is a renowned saxophonist from Long Island, NY; Gerry Rafferty was from Scotland though.
This is why I love RP.  I get to hear things I wouldn't normally be exposed to; like this track.   This is my 3rd hearing of it and it hasn't yet grown on me.  I always have to listen to the original after hearing this version.     So while I may not love this version, it makes me appreciate RP all the more!
Foo Fighters do a great cover version of the song, so it is possible. This just isn’t a very good cover - it doesn’t add anything, it just subtracts.
 fredriley wrote:

Summary: London sucks.




funny, I never thought of this as a song about London. But as a dumb 14 yr old in the US when the original came out, it reminded me of the West Coast. Something about that great sax solo, I think. Of course, Gerry Mulligan was from Scotland
 fredriley wrote:

A good cover adds something not in the original, an extra twist. This adds urban weltschmertz to Rafferty's upbeat song.



I prefer the original without hesitation: some songs create a distinctive and unforgettable sound and Baker Street is one of those.
To me that sax solos are consubstantial to the song,  period.
 ace-marc wrote:

Terrible cover. 
Waste of time.



agreed

the heroin version 
Just imagine this was the original and Gerry Rafferty's version was the cover. Makes sense somehow, eh? So you must see clearly that time travel must be possible. Flawed by the fact that in this case neither one would be original - but that's the paradoxon of time travel one should never question.
rarely impressed with "these" upbeat song remakes......when made into mellow numbers

this sucks also - yuck

Now I REALLY need to hear me some Gerry Rafferty :)
The original is so great / hard cover to do justice to!
 fredriley wrote:
Summary: London sucks.
 I happen to like London quite a bit. Much better than NYC where I'm "from".

I like Shawn Colvin, but this does no justice to the original. Feels flat and dead to me.
I think the original song is so good that this one is also good.  Not great, but good.  Sounds like David Crosby tossing in some harmonies?
It works for me. The original was city-centric ("City to City"...); this is country, but the same personalities live in one or the other place. "Buyin' some land", isn't only the dream of city dwellers.
This is painful to listen to. Shawn Colvin seems unable to do anything now but bad covers. She ought to go back to writing her own tunes, as in A Few Small Repairs.
PSD for this boy.
 ExploitingChaos wrote:
When I hear covers like that it's usually the coffee shop version, you know, the neutered version

But THIS has something the original didn't portray in the musical track behind the lyrics, and it works great with these lyrics!

So it stands on it's own I feel. A solid 9 from your boy.

Peace and love we are all sisters and brothers
 I agree.  Love it!

Summary: London sucks.
Nah.  Horrible.  The original evoked Baker Street, this evokes Cow Corner.
When I hear covers like that it's usually the coffee shop version, you know, the neutered version

But THIS has something the original didn't portray in the musical track behind the lyrics, and it works great with these lyrics!

So it stands on it's own I feel. A solid 9 from your boy.

Peace and love we are all sisters and brothers
 MattRudely wrote:
Hey, it works without the sax break!

Oh wait, no it doesn't.

At all.

Obviously.
 
But on the upside, if there's no one else in the room you get to sing it yourself!

BWEEE-WOWOW-WADDA-WOOOOOOW!

pyeeeeeew!

BWEE-WOWWAH-DADA-DOOOOOOOW!

pyeeeeew!

BWEE-WOWOW-DA-WOWOW DADA-WOW!!!!!
It's a nice cover, but damn nobody could perform this like Rafferty.
Once again, we get to hear a fascinating cover of a familiar tune. Please don't ever kick this habit, folks.
 Solanus wrote:

Collective Soul - Shine?
 

Or maybe Joleen from Miley Cyrus.
Terrible cover. 
Waste of time.
Hey, it works without the sax break!

Oh wait, no it doesn't.

At all.

Obviously.
a great version of a great song. hearing Croz's voice come in on the chorus took this one from an 8 to a 9 for me.
Terrific cover.
 bluehz wrote:
several of these remakes Ive been hearing lately on RP like this one that just blow me away. Heard a Dolly Parton song she covered someone, cant remember who, on here the other day that just BLEW ME AWAY... and I used to DISLIKE Dolly Parton.
 
Collective Soul - Shine?
Pretty song - but let's stick to the original please.
A good cover adds something not in the original, an extra twist. This adds urban weltschmertz to Rafferty's upbeat song.
several of these remakes Ive been hearing lately on RP like this one that just blow me away. Heard a Dolly Parton song she covered someone, cant remember who, on here the other day that just BLEW ME AWAY... and I used to DISLIKE Dolly Parton.
very nice interpretation
I've not heard this before (thanks yet again B&R!). Beautiful cover of a beautiful - if deeply sad - song. Especially sad in my mind knowing Rafferty didnt "give up the booze and the one night stands" (or at least the booze) and it ultimately killed him. I'm sure someone will step in slamming this and lamenting the lack of the glorious sax solo from the original but it doesn't actually lose strength for the absence.
yuck, what's the point of this version?
as good or better - not worse.
 Milesxl wrote:
 
 
I think it's brilliant. 
Just about acceptable, but why??
 
This side of murder.. just