more wikicrap written by R&R-despising non-native English speakers
Mood:  down
Top of the Pops (record series)  . . . anonymous cover versions of recent and current hit singles. The recordings were intended to replicate the sound of the original hits as closely as possible. The albums were recorded by a studio group comprising session musicians and singers who remained unaccredited . . .  . . . the studio singers and musicians usually tried their best. Dave Thompson for Allmusic says that "it becomes apparent that the trick is not to look upon the songs as straightforward attempts to copy the hit song, but as interpretations rendered in the style of the hit".
And so, before I had given up on Wikipedia for good, I carried on another "discussion" on their talk page.
"The recordings were intended to replicate the sound of the original hits as closely as possible." Having heard several, that is sure hard for me to believe. They were done in the same styles as the originals (unlike budget covers by many anonymous bands) but I cannot conceive of any listener having any difficulty distinguishing any TOP cover from the original recording.  me (talk) 15:59, 4 June 2010
    That wasn't the point. Back in the early 70s, there weren't compilation albums of current chart hits as there are now, these were trying to represent the songs that everyone knew. It was also a cheaper alternative when the 'proper' compilations did start appearing from the mid-70s onwards. --idiot#1 (talk) 01:51, 5 June 2010
? Then I take it that you are agreeing with me, that the line should be worded differently, as the recordings were not actually "intended to replicate the sound of the original hits as closely as possible." [I am sorry that I am not providing an alternative wording myself, as a Wiki-vandal is periodically removing all changes I make (after searching for my user name), and I find it simpler just to not bother contributing, except on talk pages.]  me(talk) 13:32, 9 June 2010
    I think the intention was for them to sound close to the originals (the arrangements and sound of the singers were similar), but obviously they were never going to succeed given time and budget constraints.--idiot#1 (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2010
        I think the statement "The recordings were intended to replicate the sound of the original hits as closely as possible" is accurate - that was the aim, to impersonate the hit singles. The degree to which they succeeded was a slightly different matter! But I think they wanted them to be as close as possible. They aren't cover versions in the usual sense - they try to reproduce each riff, vocal sound, drum pattern etc as accurately as they can - given time and money limitations and the scale of the task. —Preceding unsigned comment added by idiot#2 (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2010
In other words, if Ren & Stimpy tried to cover A Hard Day's Night by farting, idiots#1&2 would look upon them the same way, even though nobody who understands honesty would claim along with Wiki that they were intending to replicate the sound of the original hit as closely as possible.  Ah, the world of Wiki-language.