Classic Albums - Zappa Apostrophe - Great Documentary

[xilddx]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1370272009' post='2098380']
My mistake. I most have misunderstood you when you said...

"You are obviously not keen."

"Your argument has no weight."

"I doubt anyone of sound mind and knowledge would think as you do."

"You can't handle criticism." (So I assume you were criticizing me for thinking as I do and for some reason, it's okay for you to do it.)

"You're too sensitive."

"You're making value statements."

"It isn't worth engaging with you."

Sounds kinda antagonistic to me, but sometimes words get misconstrued. So it could be me.
[/quote]

Well, you seem to be on a mission. It's more helpful if you quote me accurately rather than paraphrase according to your inferences.

[Lowender]

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1370272838' post='2098394']
Well, you seem to be on a mission. It's more helpful if you quote me accurately rather than paraphrase according to your inferences.
[/quote]

It was close enough and you know it. Besides, anything more would just be more pointless engagement.

[Dave Vader]

I saw this documentary a while back on the telly, it was both interesting and informative for Zappa fans.
I bought myself a new copy of over-nite sensation for listening to in the car on the back of it.

Also, I like grandiose and silly, along with all the rest of it.

*ignoring the undercurrents*

[Lowender]

My fave Zappa work is parts of Hot Rats, parts of The Grand Wazoo and parts of Roxy and Elsewhere. That would make an awesome double album. But a lot of other stuff just misses the mark for me.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1370273243' post='2098400']
It was close enough and you know it. Besides, anything more would just be more pointless engagement.
[/quote]

OK old chap. You win.

[Lowender]

[quote name='xilddx' timestamp='1370273644' post='2098409']
OK old chap. You win.
[/quote]

I'm not sure what I won nor do I care to have won. I just hoped you learned that you shouldn't make presumptions about people. You may want to watch that.

[Wil]

Something for everybody really in his back catalogue. There's definitely a lot of it that doesn't do it for me and the best bits are often bookended with stuff that's hard to love... Lumpy Gravy part 1 for instance. He records the most beautiful melody and then throws it into some brambles (not literally).

[MB1]

MB1.
With Mr Zappa's vast body of work
I find there's something for everyone...it's just a case of finding your preference
You can't go far wrong with...
"The Best band you've never heard"

[xilddx]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1370273856' post='2098411']
I'm not sure what I won nor do I care to have won. I just hoped you learned that you shouldn't make presumptions about people. You may want to watch that.
[/quote]

Thanks for the advice man, appreciated.

[xilddx]

[quote name='MB1' timestamp='1370275109' post='2098442']
MB1.
With Mr Zappa's vast body of work
I find there's something for everyone...it's just a case of finding your preference
You can't go far wrong with...
"The Best band you've never heard"
[/quote]

That's a great album, I prefer MAJNH by a shade. I've been really getting into the YCDTOSA series lately.

[MB1]

MB1.
Make a jazz noise is another great album (perhaps not the best to start the adventure)
The "You can't do that on stage anymore" albums do give a interesting insight
(Volume 3...Montana intro...)

[BassTractor]

[quote name='foal30' timestamp='1370221156' post='2097812']
don't eat the yellow coloured snow is amongst the best advice I have ever received.
[/quote]

Fascinating. I taught my kids to never pee in yellow snow ...


best,
bert

[BetaFunk]

Sadly this is never going to rise to the heights of The Beatles thread. It looks as though either not enough hooks have been cast or maybe it's simply that the fish ain't biting.

[Dingus]

I grew up listening to Frank Zappa , and I definitely think he had a spark of genius to him - certainly he had an abundance of talents and originality - but was damned to an extent by having such a prolific output . Like a number of other exceptionally gifted artists , he needed an editor , someone to say "no" to him once in a while and to cut down or in certain instances cut out certain excesses and indulgences in his music . He made so many records and created so much music , all on his own uncompromising terms , that it's not surprising some of it has held up better than some other parts . If Frank had gone the same route as most mainstream rock artists and turned out an album every two or three years , imagine on the depth of material he would have had to choose from . With some outside input , he could have honed that material into a consumate rock album to compete with any of his contemporaries . But the reality is that if he had done that he wouldn't have been the Frank Zappa that we all know of many of us love , whatever his percieved shortcomings . And he took a penguin , and put it in bondage .

[BetaFunk]

This is hopeless. Look, we're never going to eclipse the legendary Fab Four thread if we all keep agreeing.

Perhaps we a need a 'Was Zappa better than the Beatles' thread.

[Lowender]

I don't see this in any way as comparable to the Beatles argument. To me, there's no argument there. The Beatles took pop music and made it high art and changed everything about it. The way it was played, the way it was sung, harmonized, composed, arranged. Every bass player has been influenced by McCartney -- whether they admit it or not and weather they even know it or not. Hell, you can say that about Harrison, Lennon and Ringo's playing. You can't say any of that about Zappa.

If Zappa made his mark, it's that he brought a 20th century sensibility to pop music. He liked Varese and Stravinsky, but didn't approach it from a schooled perspective. He saw it as weird and avant garde and exploited the tone of the times to do "his version" or weird and avant garde. He started out on the Steve Allen show playing "bicycle'. lol It was typical perfomance artist silliness. He just got really good at it. It was goofy and trippy and he pushed boundaries and for that, he's left his mark.

My point (before it was derailed) was just to say, (much as Dingus pointed out) a lot of the stuff was more goofy than great. I personally don;t find him funny. Sure, when I was 17 it was. He said cooties! He's talking about peeing in the snow! hahahahaha. But it just doesn't hold up. And much of the complexity of his music doesn't impress me because I'm a better musician than I was when I was 17. I can play complex music. It isn't enough for me. It needs to be GOOD music. And I honestly don't think a lot of it. is. Hey, Steve Vai is an AMAZING guitar player. Truly brilliant. But I think his song writing kinda sucks too. And he tries to be funny and just comes off as a fool.

But that's subjective.

And in the end, that's what all opinions are about -- explaining why you feel one way or another. Just saying something sucks because you don't like it is pretty inarticulate. And dismissing someone else because their tastes differ form yours is pretty arrogant. I think Frank would agree.

[mickster]

The problem is, Lowender, you have a way of expressing your opinions about your favourite bands in a way that *isn't* subjective, that goes beyond you just explaining why you like something and keeps making universal claims. Just re-read your first paragraph above about the Beatles. You're making hugely contentious claims for them that go way beyond just you expressing an opinion that you like them. The Beatles thread itself went the same way.

When others disagree, or post about an artist/band they like, you then seem to try to argue not just that you dont liek them as much (which is cool), but that they're wrong.

This is music; it's not summat that can be 'won' or disproven. Just trust in your own taste, share opinions, and let others do the same and these threads will remain much more congenial.

Edited June 4, 2013 by mickster

[Lowender]

[quote name='mickster' timestamp='1370335726' post='2099157']
The problem is, Lowender, you have a way of expressing your opinions about your favourite bands in a way that *isn't* subjective, that goes beyond you just explaining why you like something and keeps making universal claims. Just re-read your first paragraph above about the Beatles. You're making hugely contentious claims for them that go way beyond just you expressing an opinion that you like them. The Beatles thread itself went the same way.

When others disagree, or post about an artist/band they like, you then seem to try to argue not just that you dont liek them as much (which is cool), but that they're wrong.

This is music; it's not summat that can be 'won' or disproven. Just trust in your own taste, share opinions, and let others do the same and these threads will remain much more congenial.
[/quote]

Well, I think you're absolutely wrong -- not because I disagree with your opinion, but that you're saying I'm doing things that I am not doing. Your claim is simply erroneous.

I never ONCE said I thought someone was wrong for liking someone I didn't care for. Not ONCE. In fact, I've said quite the opposite. Maybe you have me confused with someone else.

Edited June 4, 2013 by Lowender

[Dave Vader]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1370335871' post='2099160']
Well, I think you're absolutely wrong -- not because I disagree with your opinion, but that you're saying I'm doing things that I am not doing. Your claim is simply erroneous.

I never ONCE said I thought someone was wrong for liking someone I didn't care for. Not ONCE. In fact, I've said quite the opposite. Maybe you have me confused with someone else.
[/quote]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1370334012' post='2099138']
I don't see this in any way as comparable to the Beatles argument. To me, there's no argument there. The Beatles took pop music and made it high art and changed everything about it. The way it was played, the way it was sung, harmonized, composed, arranged. Every bass player has been influenced by McCartney -- whether they admit it or not and weather they even know it or not. Hell, you can say that about Harrison, Lennon and Ringo's playing. You can't say any of that about Zappa.

(......)

But that's subjective.
[/quote]

[xilddx]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1370335871' post='2099160']
Well, I think you're absolutely wrong -- not because I disagree with your opinion, but that you're saying I'm doing things that I am not doing. Your claim is simply erroneous.

I never ONCE said I thought someone was wrong for liking someone I didn't care for. Not ONCE. In fact, I've said quite the opposite. Maybe you have me confused with someone else.
[/quote]

I wish there was a well loaded bong near you, and that you would take advantage of its proximity.

[Lowender]

[quote name='Dave Vader' timestamp='1370336549' post='2099168']
[/quote]

Nice try. But I never said anyone was wrong for not liking the Beatles -- they would just be wrong in not recognizing their influence. Sorry for the confusion. But I imagine you were just reaching for something there, right?

xiddxx, I don't get the bong reference. I'm sure it's clever though.


Bass Tractor. You're taking it personally -- exactly what i was trying not to do. I never said his music wasn't structured. So your entire argument is based on misinformation. I made the point earlier about scoring a cat walking across a piano would be difficult, but it'll still sound like a cat walking across a piano. Oh well. I guess I didn't state my case very well. Or maybe it was stated too well.
I'm not sure.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Lowender' timestamp='1370353585' post='2099566']
Nice try. But I never said anyone was wrong for not liking the Beatles -- they would just be wrong in not recognizing their influence. Sorry for the confusion. But I imagine you were just reaching for something there, right?

xiddxx, I don't get the bong reference. I'm sure it's clever though.


Bass Tractor. You're taking it personally -- exactly what i was trying not to do. I never said his music wasn't structured. So your entire argument is based on misinformation. I made the point earlier about scoring a cat walking across a piano would be difficult, but it'll still sound like a cat walking across a piano. Oh well. I guess I didn't state my case very well. Or maybe it was stated too well.
I'm not sure.
[/quote]

In essence, you think most of Zappa's music is very difficult but unmusical, influenced little, and was nothing new or innovative, whereas the Beatles were total gamechanging geniuses who made pop music into high art and influenced everyone, even if they are not aware of it. That and the fact that anyone who disagrees with your opinion is WRONG.

[BetaFunk]

I knew a pole vaulter called Arthur once. We used to call him High Art.

[xilddx]

[quote name='BetaFunk' timestamp='1370354332' post='2099585']
I knew a pole vaulter called Arthur once. We used to call him High Art.
[/quote]

I think don't think the Beatles music was high art in that sense

[Conan]