Zappa - what a tight music arranger

[herodotus]

Zappa put out 60 albums over 30+ years. To say anything meaningful about his music takes a bit of effort. And of course, who wants to put in the effort? It's not like anyone is going to know or care.
...
It always amazes me how hostile people are to music that is any more complex than a Michael Jackson song.

What always amazes me is how quickly someone will try to dismiss valid criticism that they don't agree with. Any hostility that you perceive from me is largely towards his sophomoric humor and overly cynical attitude. However, I agree with other posters that complexity for its own sake isn't necessarily interesting. There is plenty of music that is "more complex than a Michael Jackson song" that I think is marvelous and I have zero interest in feeding the trolls here so you'll just have to guess what that might be.

I've already heard more of Zappa than he deserves based on a reasonable statistical sample. From that, I've heard exactly one track that I can honestly say that I like. If I never listened to another track I feel like I've heard enough to roughly categorize him.

Sorry mate, I simply don't like his music for the most part and this thread has largely left that unchanged. You're not going to change that opinion with fallacy.

I can't imagine anything less rewarding than trying to change someone's opinion on an internet forum (except, maybe, trying to find something clever in a youtube comment thread). And to be honest, I have never understood why so many musical discussions are centered on whether or not each person does or does not like something. Like can be a pretty irrational and downright unintelligent area of human consciousness.

For example, lots of American football fans don't like Tom Brady. And you know, some of them will even try to convince you that it has nothing to do with the fact that he has regularly beaten their favorite team. Certainly the irrationality of this kind of like is plain for all to see. And I certainly can't see how it is ever going to foster meaningful exchange with people who, say, do like Tom Brady.

Now of course, music is quite different than sport. And I have no doubt that disagreements concerning musical preferences are almost without exception less primitive in expression than the chanted taunts, thrown urine, and downright hooliganism that can characterize the behavior of some of the world's many sports fans. But that certainly doesn't make musical likes any more rational.

And before anyone brings this up yet again, yes, there is a great deal of the irrational in art. People have strong irrational opinions about music or any kind of art, and from these opinions much of their musical psyche is generated. But music isn't just irrational.

There are aspects of musical talent that are by and large objectively verifiable. The same way that athletic records or engineering milestones are objectively verifiable; the same way that the soundness of the construction of anything from a house to a clay pot can be objectively verified. Frank Zappa could do things that many other musicians are simply unable to do. To take 2 common examples, many musicians struggle with constantly changing time signatures, and even more people have trouble playing in one time signature while someone else plays in a completely different time signature, but FZ and the musicians he worked with were all quite gifted in both of these areas.

Now this is one of those things that should go without saying: that whether you like his music or hate it, you have to acknowledge these verifiable examples of advanced musical ability. But with FZ, the studied disregard of these abilities is almost universal.

Note, how in your very first contribution to this thread you wrote:
"I'm not saying anything about his skill as a musician..."

And yet the whole point of the thread was to discuss his skill as a musical arranger, which one would think was at least tangentially related to his skill as a musician!!!

Now I get that FZ was a polarizing figure. Lots of people hate him, and I have been hearing them share their reasons for hating him for over 20 years now. And I have to tell you, there isn't much variation to these criticisms.

At the same time, he has also attracted a decent number of fanatical followers, and among them are some who see in him some sort of oracle of truth, which is as silly in this case as it is in any other case. And the most depressing thing is that none of these fans spend much time talking about FZ's unique musical gifts. I have known only a handful of Zappa fans in my life, and not one of them liked the bizarre and complex instrumental stuff that he put so much time and energy into. No, they like the vast number of silly little ditties that he made all too many of.

I am not anything like FZ's biggest fan, and I probably haven't listened to him more than twice in the past 18 months. When people insult his humor I tend to agree with them, and if all of his 'greatest hits' were erased from history I wouldn't be horribly upset.

But the man was a bona fide musical genius. Don't take my word for it, listen to this guy named Slonimsky:

This isn't 'proof' of course. As I said earlier, I know I will never prove anything to anyone regarding what they like or don't like. But such an endorsement from such a musician seemed significant and worth mentioning.

And that is all I have time for.

[jancivil]

Because of the street fair right on top of where I'm staying, I was forced to hear a bunch of music I would not choose to. Most of it, I mean nearly all of it was garbage. However, Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough, apparently a Michael Jackson record, was played. The drummer and bass player on that, this is unsurpassed funk, absolutely fantastic track. It's a truly worthless song, as a song. Dance club mindlessness or activities revolving around getting somebody to f**k you I find absolutely boring. But I don't care, really. Lyrics, messages in music, it's all good but it isn't compelling outside of the music.

Who cares what you like? ghettosynth keeps on about it. We got it already, buddy. There is nothing interesting about your posts. Your musical reasoning? Well, you did the same thing to me, a long attack, totally ad hominem trying to make it look like it was something it wasn't. It isn't anything. You don't like things I like. You don't like me, for the same reasons people don't like you. What do you have on offer, then?

Is it fun for people to just try and negate something, are you that goddamned lacking in shit to do. You don't like a guy, bfd.

There will be all kinds of action in the music you don't get. The whole take away for me reading that stuff is here is a person that does not have the kind of curiosity I would need to find in someone to hang out with at all. That isn't interesting either, is it. So what's the gain? It's just shitty.

[ghettosynth]

The whole take away for me reading that stuff is here is a person that does not have the kind of curiosity I would need to find in someone to hang out with at all.

LOL! That might be the most hilarious, self-centered, and ironic POV that I've ever read on KVR.

You seem pretty lonely TBH, have you thought about getting a cat?

[Rappo Clappo]

Wait! Zappa... isn't that the guy who wrote the Tight Pants/Body Rolls sheet music arrangement?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J1c2KzJbcGA

[ghettosynth]

And before anyone brings this up yet again, yes, there is a great deal of the irrational in art. People have strong irrational opinions about music or any kind of art, and from these opinions much of their musical psyche is generated. But music isn't just irrational.

You're far overextending anything that I said to you. There are far more dimensions to the rational perspective of music other than complexity as well. I neither like the majority of Zappa's work, nor, do I respect his ability to create compelling music. That's not the same thing as creating "complex" music or music that is appreciated by someone. I have my own opinions on the details of this and they are supported by some who knew him well, I would suggest wider reading to get any kind of grasp on my perspective. You won't get it here, least of all in a thread like this.

The blunt truth is that my perspective does not need approval from yours. If you don't want to talk about how or why people "like" something, then don't, but you don't get to tell other people that they can't talk about "liking" or "not liking" music.

If you post a Zappa thread, someone is going to say "I don't really like his stuff." Get over it, that's never going to change.

[ghettosynth]

Wait! Zappa... isn't that the guy who wrote the Tight Pants/Body Rolls sheet music arrangement?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J1c2KzJbcGA

... saving people some effort.

[herodotus]

And before anyone brings this up yet again, yes, there is a great deal of the irrational in art. People have strong irrational opinions about music or any kind of art, and from these opinions much of their musical psyche is generated. But music isn't just irrational.

You're far overextending anything that I said to you.

Actually, I wasn't just replying to you. The whole 'music is fundamentally irrational' trope is brought up so often in this context that I just wanted to get it out of the way.

There are far more dimensions to the rational perspective of music other than complexity as well.

I didn't even mention complexity. I mentioned specific musical skills that have been part of western art music for over a century. Whether or not they are 'complex' depends on the individual's own skill set.

I neither like the majority of Zappa's work, nor, do I respect his ability to create compelling music.

The word 'compelling' is inherently subjective. You will grant this, will you not?

So you are yet again saying that you don't like his music, twice in fact, only worded differently the second time.

That's not the same thing as creating "complex" music or music that is appreciated by someone.

There you go with 'complexity' again. This is your word, not mine. Zappa's music is complex compared to some music, but less complex compared to other music. Pierre Boulez and Gyorgi Ligeti have both composed music that is much more complex. Of course, many don't like their music either.

I have my own opinions on the details of this and they are supported by some who knew him well, I would suggest wider reading to get any kind of grasp on my perspective.

Ah. Anonymous sources prove I am wrong. And I should read more widely, because I haven't read widely enough about music. Because somehow or another, you know what I have read. Wow. You are just full of well supported deep insights, which, unfortunately, you don't feel the need to share or document.

The blunt truth is that my perspective does not need approval from yours.

I certainly never thought that it did. But then, no one needs approval from you either.

If you don't want to talk about how or why people "like" something, then don't, but you don't get to tell other people that they can't talk about "liking" or "not liking" music.

I didn't try to forbid it. I simply find it tedious. Am I not allowed to express my opinion?

If you post a Zappa thread, someone is going to say "I don't really like his stuff." Get over it, that's never going to change.

I am 'over it'. I just wish that musical discussions would occasionally be a little less boring.

[ghettosynth]

Ah. Anonymous sources prove I am wrong.

Ah, you misunderstand, I'm not trying to prove you wrong, I don't even know what you're trying to claim, nor do I care. I don't know how else to say, I'm not at all interested in this kind of discussion with you. You responded to me, I simply called you out on your projection onto people who disagree with your taste assessment. Beyond that, I am simply giving you a path to understand my POV, assuming that's possible. If you don't want to take it, that's your choice, but it's of no concern to me. I'm simply choosing not to discuss this POV here as I believe that it will just fan flames of little value.

Complexity is an umbrella term that encompasses everything that you mentioned and largely what the vast majority of Zappa critics will discuss. If you choose not to understand that simple idea, that's on you, but you're wasting your time trying to turn it into a debate.

Recall your absurd claim:

It always amazes me how hostile people are to music that is any more complex than a Michael Jackson song.

First, it's nonsense, second, there's that word, you used it yourself, so clearly, you DO think that it's a property that is at issue here. So give it a rest, ok? You don't get to all of a sudden demand precision in debate when you've stooped to hyperbole just to support your own taste. People have no problem with music that is complex, they just think that Zappa isn't compelling. The fallacy began with you in the first place, and dealing with that was the only reason that I responded to you.

I am 'over it'. I just wish that musical discussions would occasionally be a little less boring.

Well, yes, you owe me an irony meter, and, if you're over it, you'll not waste any more ink quoting my text but will accept that we simply disagree.

I think that the flaw in your reasoning here is believing that people who think Zappa is boring are looking for a technical debate with those who disagree. You are wanting to frame things in terms of absolutes, but then choose to use words like "genius", which you cannot define.

[rp314]

A couple of things from Burnt Weeny Sandwich (1970) which I bet Slonimsky probably liked.





By the way, Slonimsky, who died a few years after Frank at the ripe old age of 101, was already in his 20s when Stravinsky's L'Histoire du soldat was first performed.

[PurpleCatfishBettie]

frank zappa was definitely a maker of tight arrangements. it would probably be impossible to successfully argue otherwise.

i really like some of what i've heard of him, but not enough to go exploring the entire catalog.

frank to me was a good guitarist; steve vai is a great guitarist. that's a can of worms right there; rating various guitarists.

when i was a kid back in about 1980, my friends and i listened to hendrix, zep, boc, etc.

at the time, there was this older cat in the neighborhood, maybe 5 years beyond the age of 'our clique'. this dude was way into zappa. he had an sg, a zappa facial hairstyle, and a massive zappa record collection. he told me once that page sounded 'herky jerky', or 'un-fluid', whereas zappa were a 'perfect guitar player'. you see, i thought page was the 'greatest', but all the same, could understand what that guy was saying.

anyway, i deeply respect zappa and his crew as musicians; don't listen much, if at all to their records; but do -- to this day -- listen to steve vai now and then.

(we used to play 'mr. green genes' in high school stage band, and outside of school, our local 'zappa fandude' would show up at keggar/jams with his friends and jam on the same)

[sfxsound3]

Zappa sucks!

OK, end of topic.

[herodotus]

Recall your absurd claim:

It always amazes me how hostile people are to music that is any more complex than a Michael Jackson song.

You know, I hate to waste any of that precious internet 'ink', but I really think I should at least try to clear this one up.

In the first place, it is not a claim, it is an observation. I have observed exactly that over many years. And FZ is not the subject of most of this hostility. Schoenberg and Webern, for example, received much more hate, with much less approval, than FZ.

First, it's nonsense

No, it isn't. Observations can't be 'nonsense'. They can be mistaken, but you haven't had the experiences I have had, so you aren't in a position to judge that.

second, there's that word, you used it yourself, so clearly, you DO think that it's a property that is at issue here.

Now this is nonsense. People hate calculus because it is complex and hard to understand, but that doesn't mean that the people who use it (e.g. physicists) like it because it is complex and hard to understand.

So give it a rest, ok?

At the end of this post. I promise.

You don't get to all of a sudden demand precision in debate when you've stooped to hyperbole just to support your own taste.

It wasn't hyperbole, and wasn't to support anything. This sentence you are obsessing over was a spontaneous expression of disappointment, and nothing more.

People have no problem with music that is complex

Now THIS is where we will have to agree to disagree. Because that just doesn't add up at all. All you have to do is look at Billboard's charts and compare them with a history of avant-garde music during the same years to see that there is absolutely no cross-over between the two at all.

[ghettosynth]

Recall your absurd claim:

It always amazes me how hostile people are to music that is any more complex than a Michael Jackson song.

You know, I hate to waste any of that precious internet 'ink', but I really think I should at least try to clear this one up.

In the first place, it is not a claim, it is an observation.

LOL! You're just mad because you're being called out on your bullshit. Of course it's a claim and since you're making it in this thread, of course you're trying to talk about Zappa. Spare everyone the pseudo intellectual sophistry, ok?

It's the very definition of hyperbole, you reached for the obvious comparison in order to exaggerate your claim.

[ghettosynth]

at the time, there was this older cat in the neighborhood, maybe 5 years beyond the age of 'our clique'. this dude was way into zappa. he had an sg, a zappa facial hairstyle, and a massive zappa record collection. he told me once that page sounded 'herky jerky', or 'un-fluid', whereas zappa were a 'perfect guitar player'.

Yeah, everyone knows that guy.

(we used to play 'mr. green genes' in high school stage band, and outside of school, our local 'zappa fandude' would show up at keggar/jams with his friends and jam on the same)

Yeah, you've either gotta keep the party on the DL or take other extraordinary measures if you don't want him to show up uninvited out of the blue; this is why dance music was invented, really.

[t3toooo]