Mumford & Sons — The Boxer (w/ Jerry Douglas)
Album: BabelAvg rating:
Your rating:
Total ratings: 392
Length: 3:57
Plays (last 30 days): 0
share
tweet
I am just a poor boy
Though my story seldom told
I squandered my resistance
For a pocket full of mumbles such are promises
All lies and jests
Still a man hears
What he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
When I left my home and my family
I was no more than a boy
In the company of strangers
In the quiet of the railway stations running scared
Laying low seeking out the poor quarters
Where the ragged people go
Looking for the places
Only they would know
Asking only workman's wages
I come looking for a job
But I get no offers
Just a come on
From the whores of seventh avenue
I do declare there were times
That I was so lonesome
I took some comfort there
Then I'm laying down my winter clothes
And wishing I was gone going home
Where the New York City winters
Are bleeding me, bleeding me going home
In the clearing stands a boxer and a fighter by his trade
And he carries the reminder of every glove that laid him down
And cut him till he cried out in his anger and his shame
I am leaving I am leaving but the fighter sill remains
Though my story seldom told
I squandered my resistance
For a pocket full of mumbles such are promises
All lies and jests
Still a man hears
What he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
When I left my home and my family
I was no more than a boy
In the company of strangers
In the quiet of the railway stations running scared
Laying low seeking out the poor quarters
Where the ragged people go
Looking for the places
Only they would know
Asking only workman's wages
I come looking for a job
But I get no offers
Just a come on
From the whores of seventh avenue
I do declare there were times
That I was so lonesome
I took some comfort there
Then I'm laying down my winter clothes
And wishing I was gone going home
Where the New York City winters
Are bleeding me, bleeding me going home
In the clearing stands a boxer and a fighter by his trade
And he carries the reminder of every glove that laid him down
And cut him till he cried out in his anger and his shame
I am leaving I am leaving but the fighter sill remains
Comments (84)add comment
There's no feeling in it, I wonder if he's reading/singing the lyrics for the first time. Dylan's cover is better, yeah I said it.
Not horrible, but some songs are just so good that we are spoiled by the original.
Plus, it's missing the bass drum in the NYC abandoned elevator shaft.
Plus, it's missing the bass drum in the NYC abandoned elevator shaft.
This sounds like any Mumford & Sons, and not like The Boxer, at all.
Paul Simon's song is infused with his New York upbringing. This lacks all depth. Better to write your own life.
Mmm....uh....ok
Good musicians, but this is a bad tune to cover. It's waaay too autobiographical, full of Paul Simon's imagined slights early in life.
Andy_B wrote:
I PSD'ed this and got the original by S&G -- serendipity?
After hearing this rendition again, I dropped my rating from a 7 to a 6. Simon and Garfunkel they ain't. And the arrangement is more than just a little thin.
I PSD'ed this and got the original by S&G -- serendipity?
After hearing this rendition again, I dropped my rating from a 7 to a 6. Simon and Garfunkel they ain't. And the arrangement is more than just a little thin.
kcar wrote:
Pretty much.
This sounds like something from a wake on St. Patrick's Day just before everyone gets hammered.
Pretty much.
polymath wrote:
I'd go a bit higher than 4 but am with you on the reasoning. This sounds like something from a wake on St. Patrick's Day just before everyone gets hammered.
Jerry's Dobro automatically doubles my rating. Solid 4.
I'd go a bit higher than 4 but am with you on the reasoning. This sounds like something from a wake on St. Patrick's Day just before everyone gets hammered.
A clear 3 (ho-hum) from me. Loved the original, but this seems a bit amateurish to me - not the singing, but the arrangement.
To be fair I think this cover started out pretty good - i got pretty annoying by the end.
Heh...I bought this CD and this song is not on it...this is a bonus track. Sometimes I don't get RP. I think there are a few things responsible for M&M's great success. RP played almost the whole CD before they exploded in popularity. Now, RP has disowned them...Why? The second CD is pretty good. But we get this cover? Not even a good cover?
The other reason for their success is that they are a Christian band.
The other reason for their success is that they are a Christian band.
The cover is pretty good, but the song deserves better.... makes you relaise how good the original rendition actually is I guess!
Poor cover, does not do justice to the original.
Nice guitar though, 100% the best part
Nice guitar though, 100% the best part
leafmold wrote:
At least by covering a "crappy song", it's easier to improve on the original. This cover is pretty weak (IMO), but it is a great song.
Like the guitar, but somehow this cover lacks the yearning and pain of the original. I wish more people would cover crappy songs instead of the great ones.
At least by covering a "crappy song", it's easier to improve on the original. This cover is pretty weak (IMO), but it is a great song.
Good cover (6) of and outstanding song (9.5).
Jerry's Dobro automatically doubles my rating. Solid 4.
Great cover!!! Although most of my excitement is over what S&G did. This song's like pizza, even when bad, it's still pretty good.
I've been listening to the original a lot the last couple of weeks and it's such a powerful song - lyrically and musically. This cover is so weak. (Never thought I'd post a comment like this).
Tragedy is what ensues when a third rate band covers a first rate song.
Wow, so dry and useless. Some songs simply dont need to be remade. If an artist has nothing new to offer or to say, or just to pay tribute, why remake? Play it live, but dont release it on an album. A true miss by M&S.
Pales in comparison to the original.
softjeans wrote:
you have to liveslives
Sorry -- a glitch. Meant to say you need to see them live.
you have to liveslives
Sorry -- a glitch. Meant to say you need to see them live.
thatslongformud wrote:
you have to liveslives
It warms my heart to see the average rating on this one below a 6. The Jerry Douglas solo is very nice, but that's about it. I still don't get the Mumford & Sons phenomenon.
you have to liveslives
It warms my heart to see the average rating on this one below a 6. The Jerry Douglas solo is very nice, but that's about it. I still don't get the Mumford & Sons phenomenon.
I wish I was listening to the orignal version.
Like the guitar, but somehow this cover lacks the yearning and pain of the original. I wish more people would cover crappy songs instead of the great ones.
Please make it stop, what a waste of Jerry Douglas's talent.
The only redeeming quality about this is the work of Jerry Douglas.
The chorus sounds a bit like a sing-along in a bar. (IMO, not a good thing)
I've been tired of M&S for a while. The good thing about this song is that it brings back memories...
Wow, lots of hate here, for a cover of a great song. I grew up on Simon and Garfunkle, and no the cover is not the same. But, it pay homage to a great song. It is well done, I like it, and by liking it I take nothing away from the original. No need to hate a great song.
This is the kind of thing that a band like this should enjoy playing together on their own, savouring the sweet harmonies, getting all pumped up on the 'lai lai lai' parts. But - it's a cover that did not need to be recorded.
Gives me chills -- just not in a good way.
Jerry Douglas is the only thing worth listening to here.
Hasan wrote:
Don't hold back...how do you really feel about it?
Geez! This is really horrible.
Don't hold back...how do you really feel about it?
Geez! This is really horrible.
Something that has bothered me in general but, how can this guy afford to go to a prostitute?
Please no more of this song. Really tired of the Mumford & Sons hype.
jocelynsart wrote:
Agree completely!
can't stand this band but actually do like this cover they did.
Agree completely!
can't stand this band but actually do like this cover they did.
I like this band, but please add this to the list of unnecessary remakes.
More of the same.
A good cover is enjoyable on its own and brings out stuff you might not have noticed in the original. This is the opposite.
eswiley2 wrote:
Yep. You can't improve on the original.
And I do with M & Sons hadn't tried.
Yep. You can't improve on the original.
And I do with M & Sons hadn't tried.
zair99 wrote:
Yep. You can't improve on the original.
If the original wasn't so amazing, this cover might sound better. I do have to agree that Jerry Douglas is very good on this one, though.
Yep. You can't improve on the original.
Meh.
If the original wasn't so amazing, this cover might sound better. I do have to agree that Jerry Douglas is very good on this one, though.
Don't like the phrasing of this version. Jerry Douglas is a saving grace though.
Gets a 6 because it's a great song and Jerry.
Kinda spooky as S & G were called Tom and Jerry.
Gets a 6 because it's a great song and Jerry.
Kinda spooky as S & G were called Tom and Jerry.
MJdub wrote:
I am a Mumford fan, and do very much like this unique cover to which Jerry Douglas adds some lovely fills.
Almost every cover offered up on RP gets an extraordinary number of "hate" votes: "doesn't compare to the original," and so forth. Hmm. Covers, like any other song, have to survive on their own merits, regardless of what you think about their faithfulness, or lack thereof, to the original. I like covers because they invariably provide another perspective. A great example is Ben Mon Oncle's "Seven Nation Army," which takes a somewhat neanderthal duet and gives it a proper band with a horn section. Not better, but different—and IMHO way more fun.
Many, many years ago we saw Big Audio Dynamite at the old Bayou in Washington, D.C. touring behind their first album. Of course they tore the place up, encoring with a cover of Prince's "1999." It bore only passing resemblance to the original, but punctuated the evening with a raucous, joyous sing along that left us all breathless. Now, that's what a cover should do.
Boy you were right. I'm not much of a Mumford fan myself, but I don't see why so much hate. People are saying this adds nothing to the original. I hear the lead singer's unique vocal stylings, some nice big fat vocal harmonies, and one hell of a dobro solo. These are clearly, at the least, what this adds to the original. You may disagree with what's been subtracted, but that's the point of a good cover — adding some to make it interesting and add a new "style", subtracting some so it isn't too much of a copy.
I am a Mumford fan, and do very much like this unique cover to which Jerry Douglas adds some lovely fills.
Almost every cover offered up on RP gets an extraordinary number of "hate" votes: "doesn't compare to the original," and so forth. Hmm. Covers, like any other song, have to survive on their own merits, regardless of what you think about their faithfulness, or lack thereof, to the original. I like covers because they invariably provide another perspective. A great example is Ben Mon Oncle's "Seven Nation Army," which takes a somewhat neanderthal duet and gives it a proper band with a horn section. Not better, but different—and IMHO way more fun.
Many, many years ago we saw Big Audio Dynamite at the old Bayou in Washington, D.C. touring behind their first album. Of course they tore the place up, encoring with a cover of Prince's "1999." It bore only passing resemblance to the original, but punctuated the evening with a raucous, joyous sing along that left us all breathless. Now, that's what a cover should do.
horrible grumbling.
asusinskas wrote:
Well stated and I concur...uninspired...
This is a pretty lame rendition of an extraordinary piece of music. Jerry Douglas does add a nice touch though.
Well stated and I concur...uninspired...
This is a pretty lame rendition of an extraordinary piece of music. Jerry Douglas does add a nice touch though.
Absolute failure. These boys should stick to the high-school-grade rhymes and leave the rest untouched. Shoo! Begone!
Ugh...I need negative ratings.
Ugh...I need negative ratings.
Mumford and Sons are fine, but no one should try to cover this song.
BTW, watch this clip where Paul Simon invites Art Garfunkel to join him onstage to perform "The Boxer". This was from one of the first episodes of Saturday Night Live in 1975 and Paul Simon was hosting. (SNL was a whole different thing then...) This performance was after Simon & Garfunkel had split up, and Art had gone off to do a movie (Catch 22 I think), and there was still some animosity in the air. I think Paul ribbed Art more than Art deserved when he came on stage, but after the song was over you can see Paul showing some genuine appreciation toward Art.
Nonetheless, as live performances go, this is an incredible one to watch.
https://youtu.be/zT6l8XG0vFM
BTW, watch this clip where Paul Simon invites Art Garfunkel to join him onstage to perform "The Boxer". This was from one of the first episodes of Saturday Night Live in 1975 and Paul Simon was hosting. (SNL was a whole different thing then...) This performance was after Simon & Garfunkel had split up, and Art had gone off to do a movie (Catch 22 I think), and there was still some animosity in the air. I think Paul ribbed Art more than Art deserved when he came on stage, but after the song was over you can see Paul showing some genuine appreciation toward Art.
Nonetheless, as live performances go, this is an incredible one to watch.
https://youtu.be/zT6l8XG0vFM
gjwyatt wrote:
I agree with Patti, there are a lot of covers and this happens to be a pretty good one. Now for a bad one, try Ben l'Oncle Soul's cover of Seven National Army. Hard Rock goes Soul? No thanks.
I find this cover too similar to the original to be interesting. I can't see what's the point in taking such a perfect song and redoing it without adding any new interpretation or something like that. Ben l'Oncle Soul's cover of Seven Nation Army is the opposite example - you can love it or hate it but at least it is interesting enough to be worthwhile (I personally like it).
I agree with Patti, there are a lot of covers and this happens to be a pretty good one. Now for a bad one, try Ben l'Oncle Soul's cover of Seven National Army. Hard Rock goes Soul? No thanks.
I find this cover too similar to the original to be interesting. I can't see what's the point in taking such a perfect song and redoing it without adding any new interpretation or something like that. Ben l'Oncle Soul's cover of Seven Nation Army is the opposite example - you can love it or hate it but at least it is interesting enough to be worthwhile (I personally like it).
This is my favorite S and G song. This cover version lacks the subtlety and pathos of the original, adds nothing new. And I have nothing against covers, I just think they should offer some different or special interpretation. This is blah.
This cover offers nothing new and is inferior to the original.
MJdub wrote:
Boy you were right. I'm not much of a Mumford fan myself, but I don't see why so much hate. People are saying this adds nothing to the original.
I hear the lead singer's unique vocal stylings, some nice big fat vocal harmonies, and one hell of a dobro solo. These are clearly, at the least, what this adds to the original. You may disagree with what's been subtracted, but that's the point of a good cover — adding some to make it interesting and add a new "style", subtracting some so it isn't too much of a copy.
You're right, of course, since I agree.
Boy you were right. I'm not much of a Mumford fan myself, but I don't see why so much hate. People are saying this adds nothing to the original.
I hear the lead singer's unique vocal stylings, some nice big fat vocal harmonies, and one hell of a dobro solo. These are clearly, at the least, what this adds to the original. You may disagree with what's been subtracted, but that's the point of a good cover — adding some to make it interesting and add a new "style", subtracting some so it isn't too much of a copy.
You're right, of course, since I agree.
Does not do much for me.
Every time I hear this cover it reminds me how great the original was. This version always sounds rushed.
I have to PSD this and quick before this band ruins it for me. God save us from Mumford and Sons.
I like it. The whole album is pretty damn good in fact.
This offers absolutely NO contribution to the galaxy of music.
Dreadful.
This is actually Jerry Douglas' version, with M&S doing vocals and Paul Simon himself helping out as well. It's on the album Traveler which came out in June, 2012. It's a bonus track on Babel.
Studley wrote:
Boy you were right. I'm not much of a Mumford fan myself, but I don't see why so much hate. People are saying this adds nothing to the original.
I hear the lead singer's unique vocal stylings, some nice big fat vocal harmonies, and one hell of a dobro solo. These are clearly, at the least, what this adds to the original. You may disagree with what's been subtracted, but that's the point of a good cover — adding some to make it interesting and add a new "style", subtracting some so it isn't too much of a copy.
Absolutely spot-on cover version, though I can imagine the cries of sacrilege that will appear on this page if it's aired 
Boy you were right. I'm not much of a Mumford fan myself, but I don't see why so much hate. People are saying this adds nothing to the original.
I hear the lead singer's unique vocal stylings, some nice big fat vocal harmonies, and one hell of a dobro solo. These are clearly, at the least, what this adds to the original. You may disagree with what's been subtracted, but that's the point of a good cover — adding some to make it interesting and add a new "style", subtracting some so it isn't too much of a copy.
Patti wrote:
I agree with Patti, there are a lot of covers and this happens to be a pretty good one. Now for a bad one, try Ben l'Oncle Soul's cover of Seven National Army. Hard Rock goes Soul? No thanks.
Why do any artists cover songs?
That said I love the original of this song & I like this version especially for NOT using an orchestra
That said I love the original of this song & I like this version especially for NOT using an orchestra
I agree with Patti, there are a lot of covers and this happens to be a pretty good one. Now for a bad one, try Ben l'Oncle Soul's cover of Seven National Army. Hard Rock goes Soul? No thanks.
Nice, but S&G's harmonies were what put this song into the stratosphere.
Good luck to any who dare reach for it...
Good luck to any who dare reach for it...
smartn1 wrote:
Why do any artists cover songs?
That said I love the original of this song & I like this version especially for NOT using an orchestra
It's a good cover, but why? Original is so good already.
Why do any artists cover songs?
That said I love the original of this song & I like this version especially for NOT using an orchestra
Emmy Lou Harris did a bluegrass version of this song on one of her early albums. It's quite beautiful.
This is really bad - wtf were they thinking?
Shimmer wrote:
Still, it's 'way better than the Mumfords' original material! I think they could have a bright future as a Simon & Garfunkle tribute band.
Pretty, but adds almost nothing to the original.
Still, it's 'way better than the Mumfords' original material! I think they could have a bright future as a Simon & Garfunkle tribute band.
Sacrilege! As Studley noted, it was bound to be said... and I'll say it.
Lacking.
It's like M&S are trying to piss me off. Just stop it!
do. not. like. at. all.
Pretty, but adds almost nothing to the original.
It's a good cover, but why? Original is so good already.
Absolutely spot-on cover version, though I can imagine the cries of sacrilege that will appear on this page if it's aired