Eddie you wrote: "I want to write MY book."
Well, then you have to write it. Same with music. If you don't want to play "Freebird" and whatever other songs are on your list that you can't stand then don't. Write some songs that people want to hear.
I see a paradox in your earlier posts in this thread and some other recent threads and these most recent posts. You talked about your Motown band. Originals or covers? Covers = you are editing and presenting someone else's book; you've changed the characters slightly, the ending has a twist, etc. - but it's still someone else's book that you are reading with a different voice than what they originally wrote in.
What I read you saying now is that you want to do original music. If not, then I can completely understand when the audience or even other band members want to hear the song in it's most popular rendition. Unless it's the artist recognized as either the author of the song, or the artist that made it popular.
If I was a smooth vocalist and I decided to sing 'Moon River', the audience is gonna want to hear me at least ape part of Andy Williams (RIP), even if he wasn't the first to sing it.
Here's Andy Williams singing it in the early 60's:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK4pmJQ6zgMAnd then in 1970:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi0UUP7g-0MDang - if that's not nearly the same I don't know what is. Even he would have caused a ruckus if he got all jazzy with HIS version of the song, to 'make it his own' as is spoken of by covers of songs these days. And it wasn't his song, but his version is what is best loved. 8 years passed between those videos and you hear Andy copying his own inflections, slides, grace notes and what not 8 years passing. How many times do you think he performed that song in those 8 years? I wouldn't be surprised if it was 10,000 times. Don't you think he wanted to bust out of that mold a little more during that time? He couldn't. His high paying, making a living JOB was to sing that song the way the buying public wanted it to be sung. His job was to be his own tribute singer to try to nail his popular version for as long as he could do it to whatever paying listener was in the audience.
So, I am confused as to your protests about having to follow a popular rendition of popular songs, as a performing artist. I understand about the nit-picky comments of whether it's a single cymbal crash vs. splash and so forth.
When I listen to Comfortably Numb, I want to hear David Gilmour's solos - not some 'artistic' rendition. I want to hear those huge string bends and the smooth cool-ness of the perfectly placed long triplet runs over 4/4 time rhythm. If it's David Gilmour playing it or someone else, it doesn't matter - the note choices were ace in the original recording and will forever be ace. One of the few guitar solos that to me cannot be messed with because I will miss the goosebumps that I get EVERY time I hear Gilmour's original recorded version and people that can ape it well with similar tone.
There are some exceptions, I think I prefer Seal's version of "Fly Like An Eagle" over Steve Miller bands original. But I like both versions. However, that's not a solo-centric song like Comfortably Numb, or like a solo performer iconic performance like Andy Williams' Moon River (which is originally Mancini/Mercer, correct?)
Maybe that's where your protest breaks down. What caused a song to be iconic? If it's a particular solo, then you have to nail the solo. It's the voice of the song. If it's a solo artist, and not a full-on band performance, then I would say that there's probably much less room for improvisation and creative room than with a band-centric performance where even the famous band took their own liberties with the songs.
It's one of the reasons I usually avoid 'Live' CDs, let alone going to hear a local band play cover tunes. The 'Live' CD is often a disappointment to me, not due to any ineptitude by the band/artist, but often they go off on a different tangent than where the original recording takes me emotionally.
Does that make sense?