Zappa - what a tight music arranger

[ghettosynth]

Richard Carpenter, now that is one awesome music arranger!

not really

He's pretty f**king mediocre if you ask me.

Good job I didn't ask you then, who needs butter knives when the real deal is around.

Carpenter is a genius. Just listen to We've only just begun or Yesterday, once more

I don't know about Richard Carpenter, but that Lawrence Welk, hey now!

[Numanoid]

but that Lawrence Welk, hey now!

Pheeeft. Can't compare to Al Yankovich's polka medleys

[ghettosynth]

but that Lawrence Welk, hey now!

Pheeeft. Can't compare to Al Yankovich's polka medleys

Weird Al, now there's a tight music arranger.

[herodotus]

I don't think anyone really pursues "complexity for its own sake". Most people who pursue complex ideas do so because they find them to be more interesting.

Given the difficulty involved in creating any music at all, making it more complex to execute for no real reason seems like a hopeless endeavor at best. It seems far more likely that the complexity involved satisfies a creative need felt by the musician.

If the job of professional musicians is to write songs, perform them, and record them (and it is), it makes no sense for anyone to make these tasks more difficult just for the sake of it. Certainly, humans can be perverse, but rarely so extravagantly.

I suggest that a much more plausible hypothesis is that musicians who are going through all of the extra effort required to make complex and unconventional music are doing so because they enjoy the process of doing so.

And that is not 'complexity for its own sake', but rather, 'complexity for the sake of personal satisfaction', which is quite different.

[ghettosynth]

I don't think anyone really pursues "complexity for its own sake". Most people who pursue complex ideas do so because they find them to be more interesting.
...
I suggest that a much more plausible hypothesis is that musicians who are going through all of the extra effort required to make complex and unconventional music are doing so because they enjoy the process of doing so.

The distinction between "pursuing it for its own sake" and "pursuing it because it's interesting" isn't worth discussing here. This is how these discussions go off the rails in the first place. If it makes you feel better to think that because you find complexity in music interesting that it justifies whatever process you choose, knock yourself out. My point was that the listener judging your music doesn't give two shits and that complexity, as a pursuit, doesn't necessarily make for better music.

[herodotus]

The distinction between "pursuing it for its own sake" and "pursuing it because it's interesting" isn't worth discussing here.

Why not? It seems to be fairly material. The first implies that someone is being perverse in a way that strains credulity, the latter simply means that someone is doing what all artists do: making the kind of music they like to listen to. This is a pretty major distinction.

This is how these discussions go off the rails in the first place.

"Discussion"? "Off the rails"?

If it makes you feel better to think that because you find complexity in music interesting that it justifies whatever process you choose, knock yourself out.

What else do artists do other than attempt to make what they find interesting? Why would that ever need to be justified?

My point was that the listener judging your music doesn't give two shits

Unless, of course, that listener shares your interests. I mean, the world is full of all kinds of music of every description. Some forms of music will have a narrower appeal than other forms, but what is wrong with that?

and that complexity, as a pursuit, doesn't necessarily make for better music.

And again, complexity is not a pursuit. It is result of pursuing other things. Whether someone is exploring non-traditional scales, or 3 part polyrhythms, or trying to write a fugue with 6 voices or a crab canon, the result may well be considered complex by the listener without the composer's ever even thinking about it. That is why I made that distinction that you said 'wasn't worth discussing'.

And no one has ever claimed that complexity necessarily makes for better music. That is a straw man if there ever was one.

[ghettosynth]

The distinction between "pursuing it for its own sake" and "pursuing it because it's interesting" isn't worth discussing here.

Why not? It seems to be fairly material.

I'm not surprised that you think so, I don't, and that's pretty much the beginning and the end of it for me.

Any kind of pseudo-intellectual justification for music outside of the context of music as an intellectual discipline misses the point in the first place.

[Rappo Clappo]

Hmm.. in what way are we discussing arrangement? I guess one has to sail with the sails they can afford..

[Harry_HH]

Hmm.. in what way are we discussing arrangement? I guess one has to sail with the sails they can afford..

[Rappo Clappo]

Mozart said he wrote kinda pop music for a living; if he would write down the music he liked himself no one would probably buy in to it, because it would be too weird.

And if it comes to arrange notes in specific no one comes close to Mozart. Because Mozart is just too weird. If only one knew how to play it.

Imagine we would only have the written music of Frank. Mozart gave very little indications. He didn't care. That would be weird, right?

Do you really think someone would actually sound like Zappa then? That's just too weird indeed. I know these things. Trust me

[ghettosynth]

Hmm.. in what way are we discussing arrangement? I guess one has to sail with the sails they can afford..

Great question, in what way are YOU discussing arrangement? Haven't seen much of that at all in this thread.

[t3toooo]

Mozart did not live from writing popular music.
He earned money from writing commission music for a few people that could afford it.His music wasn't very popular either.It was known in certain circles.

[Rappo Clappo]

@t3toooo

Mozart was a rebel but Frank was not.

[jancivil]

I don't think anyone really pursues "complexity for its own sake".

I find that a hopelessly ignorant thing to say. It's like an accusation of a lack of integrity, and you who do this have no clue what a person who made something that you feel is too complex is thinking. It implies that making simple honest emotional music is a superior ethos to something with more action musically. It's a bullshit posture.

[jancivil]

Mozart said he wrote kinda pop music for a living; if he would write down the music he liked himself no one would probably buy in to it, because it would be too weird.

And if it comes to arrange notes in specific no one comes close to Mozart. Because Mozart is just too weird. If only one knew how to play it.

Imagine we would only have the written music of Frank. Mozart gave very little indications. He didn't care. That would be weird, right?

Do you really think someone would actually sound like Zappa then? That's just too weird indeed. I know these things. Trust me

I don't trust you at all. I can't even tell if this was a put-on. If it's your actual take, you're passing weird afaic.