Rush vs Yes vs Zappa

I do sometimes use Rush's "YYZ" as an example of the Locrian mode in 20th century theory classes!

i don't even know what that means, but <3

I feel like Yes wanted to integrate classical music into rock and they actually knew what they were doing and did it in a pretty successful way. While Zappa wanted to be Varese but actually ended up sounding more like Les Baxter or Henry Mancini. And Yes seems to have taken themselves extremely seriously. Zappa maybe took himself even more seriously while working really hard to pretend like he didn't, which is pretty obnoxious. But those kind of embarrassing failures sometimes led to more interesting music.

I feel confident in asserting, just from what I've gathered from friends, that going to music school can make you hate the shit outta some music school dudes. I would further guess that a lot of music school dudes who don't seem to hate other music school dudes...are Zappa fans, and vocal about it.

in my limited experience w/music school dudes, who I totally do not hate but they do have their own distinct vibe, they also think John Williams is the fucking business.

There is something to say about that, it's rare to hear a Zappa album and just not have a reaction to it, which puts them ahead of stuff like Tales from Topographic Oceans

That said, Zappa rarely reached the heights that Yes did. I mean the great thing about the good Yes albums is that they're just satisfying from beginning to end and there's so much you can focus on, while the best moments in the Zappa catalogue rarely last more than two minutes or so

The biggest music school nerd I knew in HS (ended up going to Berklee) played in a Yes cover band!

wanted to be Varese but actually ended up sounding more like Les Baxter

This is an unnecessary zing. Are you sure he "wanted to be Varese?" Because he sure seemed to devote his life to other things.

And even if you're talking about "Uncle Meat," it's only "Les Baxter" by default because it's melodic (and not even Les Baxter-style melodic).

It wasn't even meant as a zing. I love the '60s soundtracky style of early zappa.

sund4r thank you for bringing up Norton Anthology! Check the 3rd edition (1996) and you'll see the source of my frustration. (Looking online for a more comprehensive list of the studied works; I only have the scorebook on hand.)

For Locrian mode in pop music, here's a tip: Björk "Army of Me". (She adjusts the scale in the chorus, the bass is Locrian)

Ffff now I just want to ask Owen and Sund4r what the academics think of ol' Ennio Morricone. IMO his original soundtracks are way better than orchetral renditions because the instrumentation in his filmworks include shit like sirens and vocal shouts and gunshots and stuff that AFAIK is not part of classical symphony orchestra. Probably gonna take this to a different thread...

xp I was off-base re: Gershwin, my bad. He's always been on syllabus.

xp

I mean it seems to me like he devoted much of his life to being seen as a "serious composer." But for me his greatest non-pop-song pieces sound like amazing B movie soundtracks, rather than the "guy playing pseudo-bach on a synth" sound of a lot of english prog (not specifically a Yes dig).

@ Viceroy, Sund4r's a better source, but my comp teacher loved Morricone and once turned a lecture on Barber songs (how to set the English language) into a digression about how great was the soundtrack to "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly"

For Locrian mode in pop music, here's a tip: Björk "Army of Me". (She adjusts the scale in the chorus, the bass is Locrian)

Thanks for this tip! I'll check that out when I get home.

I'm unfamiliar with the 3rd edition of NAWM tbh.

xp That's awesome!

Perhaps ill-advisedly, I stayed away from film music or virtually any sort of marketable compositional music in my studies, so can't say too much about Morricone, sorry. I mean, I wouldn't say he's part of the essential-everyone-studies-it canon.

music school dudes otm re: John Williams

This is an unnecessary zing.

it's been a while since I said "new board description," but...

OK, back to the task at hand:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN4wIpDABUU

Btw whoever mentioned music school and Dream Theater earlier: this definitely fits in with Rush. I remember my little bro trying to get into music school and having these crazy drum maps of Neal Peart's set.

Dream Theater is def a thing for music students, not academics, although we'll likely see this shift in 15-20 years.

At the last place where I taught, one percussion major did a regular graduating recital, then gave a second additional graduating recital that was all arrangements of Dream Theater and Symphony X songs for synth-marimba with accompanying rock band.

http://andrewolson.com/Neil_Peart/snakesarrows/tour/images/img10.jpg

haha though peart's got nothing on terry bozzio

re: the above clip, I love that there was a time where you could say "Sure, Geddy sings high on their records; but have you heard him live?!"

Sometimes I feel like I don't give Rush a fair chance, but then I watch a video like that and I can't stop laughing.

dear Neil Peart that is too many drums. sincerely, a guy who listens to Nile, for Christ's sake

http://www.steevi.com/Resources/bozzio.jpg

dear Neil Peart, that is a nice little cocktail kit you got there? are you in jazz combo?

this is kind of awesome

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxe-SWxDEcw

GUITAR CENTER DRUM-OFF

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR3KWRDK3_U&feature=related

of course RAVI DRUMS chose the road less travelled

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw_Bd-13YCk&feature=related

so into that terry bozzio clip but I'm pretty sure that playing it with my wife in the room mean my marriage is over

chick man, they don't get it

Rush fans = dudes who thought they were smart but weren't, really

#1 rush fan right here

god damn at that Rush "Anthem" clip

OMG 8 bass drums:
http://terrybozzio.com/kit-setup/

Who the fuck needs 26 toms??

Tom Tom Club?

sund4r I think bozzios tom are tuned to scales

Ah. OK, he mentions that in the clip you posted.

Lol I like how I said that as if the fact that they are tuned to scales somehow makes it less ridiculous

they have that already it's called a piano

it occurs to me that perhaps a lot of zappa fans are happily willing or easily able to separate performance from composition, and relate primarily to zappa as a composer and in an intellectual sense. i find it difficult to do that. when i listen to music, i'm in it for immediate sensual and emotional rewards; the intellectual appreciation of construction comes later and means less.

since it was brought up itt, "peaches en regalia" is a perfect illustration of this. the cello performance/arrangement that dan peterson posted is gorgeous. the sound of the instrument itself is a big part of that. the timbre and tone alone are immediately appealing. the performance is accomplished but not flashy, and it makes visceral, musical "sense" of the relationship between the instrument's natural sound palette and the piece's progress.

the zappa performance on hot rats, however, is just ghastly. horrible sounds thrown together with no seeming attention to timbral/tonal relation, all glopped over with useless ornamentation, and performed with a grating sort of would-be-fluid stiffness. the underlying composition is quite lovely, as it turns out, but zappa doesn't give you much reason to stick around and figure that out.

god, i really wish i could go back and edit my posts. "relate primarily to zappa as a composer" wtf?

i suppose it's also possible that some people simply don't care that much about conventionally "pleasant" sounds & arrangements, or (and i shudder to think) actually prefer the grotesque candyland chaos zappa serves up. it's certainly colorful, and i can see how it might appeal to those with a pronounced fondness for other sorts of action-packed musical zaniness: john zorn, mr bungle, les claypool, residents, etc.

the rabbit hole of chops dudes this thread has taken me down is a place I always, always love gong. Thank you, thread, for getting me to the point of watching 10-minute Steve Lukather videos from 1994.

i want to say that i dislike zappa's embittered sarcasm, but i'm not sure why i should find it so off-putting when i often enjoy something quite similar in scuzzball punk rockers like mark arm and tom hazelmeyer.

Something interesting: Songs About Fucking is arguably as or more sexist/tasteless/unpleasant as some of Zappa's shit. Yet several people have praised it on the 1987 thread and no one has complained about it, whereas not even the biggest fans here have shown much willingness to get behind stuff like "Illinois Enema Bandit", "Titties and Beer", "Sy Borg", "Bobby Brown", etc. I don't love that Big Black album but I do like it. Ditto with a lot of hip-hop. So I think it really is an aesthetic issue in Zappa's case, not a moral one: the obnoxious lyrics on the offending songs are foregrounded so heavily and sit there, sometimes with less to appreciate musically otherwise, and also just that, unlike e.g. ODB lyrics, they're so weak as comedy, with little wit or comic timing. (I guess this is similar to something I already said upthread but I was considering it again with these comparisons.)

actually prefer the grotesque candyland chaos zappa serves up. it's certainly colorful, and i can see how it might appeal to those with a pronounced fondness for other sorts of action-packed musical zaniness: john zorn, mr bungle, les claypool, residents, etc.

I haven't listened to the cello version yet but yes, this is a big part of the appeal of Zappa's instrumental music. "Grotesque candyland chaos" is a great description btw!

I could do without the more squacky moments in "Peaches", but as a whole that arrangement kills

Putting my last two ideas together, I guess one reason Zappa is frustrating is that the music itself can be delightfully humorous, his lyrics and delivery much less so.

zaniness

^