Frank Zappa: Classic or Dud?

one of the observable shifts in contemporary classical performance between the 60s and say the 90s is a general arrival of new potential dimensions of rhythmic rigour (somewhat ported in from jazz and rock by musicians adept at both but able also to read sheet music extremely well etc): anyway this is something i can imagine e.g. ensemble modern finding exciting about the demands zappa consciously made of them, which many of the composers they otherwise worked with weren't all that interested in or didn't have an ear for

high-end orchestral musicians today are just way more on it rhythmically than was mostly the case 50 years ago, and it wd probably have been fun to feel yr in sync with some specific vanguard for that (not that i much like zappa's own way with polyrhythm myself -- i remember hermeto pascoal being played a zappa piece in the wire's invisible jukebox and not identifying it but being quite scornful abt its arid stick-up-the-butt quality lol)

I don't think Magma has anything to do with Zappa tbh. As for Faust, Werner Diermaier's nickname is Zappi after all! He's one of those artists who is not as good as the people he directly inspired. Basically.

"Sorta fascinating he was able to have any kind of career." - I mean had he not come up in the 60's, sure. a lotta weird counter-culture shit was incredibly successful back then. nowadays idk what kind of following a guy like that would have.

I forget whether it's actually in the documentary, but there's a good clip of Zappa speaking astutely about how the old-school record business, the one that was run by mobbed-up goons, was better for artists because the label guys knew they didn't know shit about what people wanted, so they'd just throw everything at the wall and see what stuck. Later, when A&R guys and label heads started to think they knew something about what would sell, the boundaries of what was acceptable (i.e. what would get signed and promoted) narrowed significantly.

Yeah, I've heard him say that before, it's a good point.

Eventually all the record companies had a 'house hippy'.

Pretty much what happened in the post-Nirvana madness years, e.g. the Melvins signing to Atlantic.

nowadays idk what kind of following a guy like that would have.

The same following Devin Townsend has I guess.

I don't think Magma has anything to do with Zappa tbh

The first album has some heavy Zappa influences, less so after that though.

Ok I've never given Magma a proper go. Gonna try and maybe go on to some of these pieces frogbs is listing.

a good place to answer alphie's good question wd have been if boulez himself ever wrote abt any of zappa's music -- he wd have studied and analysed the pieces he conducted, and he's always insightful when he does explore the music he chooses to conduct… however based on (this slightly half-baked webpage of analysis of and lol guesswork about The Perfect Stranger, he never did so: Boulez is "best known as conductor of the modern classics from Wagner onwards. Secondly he was the driving force behind the Paris IRCAM institute for exploring modern music, to which the Ensemble Intercontemporain belonged. Thirdly he is a composer himself. Zappa for instance was well familiar with Boulez' composition "Le marteau sans maître" (photo downloaded, source unknown). He and Zappa would meet more often, but till his death he preferred not to comment on the quality of Zappa's music. The tensions during the recording sessions apparently had taken their toll."

ugh not sure what happened there, anyway it's here: http://www.zappa-analysis.com/the-perfect-stranger.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcRzyZOL_no
#OneThread

https://preview.redd.it/jchswnba0yu61.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=36a07b8e17da2a72370d10c32e5e04b70ae083d8

#alsoonethread

I don't think Magma has anything to do with Zappa tbh.

ha ha what

How much Magma have you listened to?

Magma's pre-MDK work always reminds me of Zappa. Or at least what he could have made if he didn't fuck around as much. idk if Vander was influenced by him, or if he was even fond of him at all. Maybe not. Tim Smith obviously was - there's a section in "Fiery Gun Hand" that I've heard referred to several times as the "Zappa bit", it doesn't quote him but it's that fast-paced squack-squack-squack go-all-over-the-scale-now-play-it-backwards thing that nobody else does.

Ultimately that's why I find Zappa fascinating. He is a universe onto himself. Him and his body of work aren't really like anything else out there. Obviously a lot of that is because he was so frustrating. He made more bad music than good. Maybe a lot more. He was smart & profound but chose to be sexist and gross most of the time. He was funny, but only when he wasn't trying to be. He had this weird obsession with challenging his audience to the point where you almost suspected he hated his fans. But it's one of those catalogues you can really get lost in - dude went through so many phases in 25 years, he had so many crazy lineups, and even the shitty albums had moments of brilliance in them. There are a lot of not-particularly-well-regarded parts of his catalogue that might be considered classic under a different name (Jazz From Hell??) If I throw on a Zappa album I at least know I won't get bored.

How much Magma have you listened to?

A lot more than you probably. Anyway you've consistently proven yourself to be a prize chump on here for years so who cares what you think.

Anyway, I don't really hear it personally but if others do, fair enough. It's more down to lack of interest in Zappa than lack of knowledge of Magma though.

Mark that's a good link will explore after I stop laughing at this:

"The European continental world of modern music during the previous century used to be full of intellectualism and leftism. It only survived on government subsidies. Flirting with communism was fashionable among European intellectuals during the seventies. Today this tendency is gone, with a remnant occurring in 2001, when Karl-Heinz Stockhausen was videotaped calling the September 11th attack a masterpiece of art."

"Magma's pre-MDK work always reminds me of Zappa. Or at least what he could have made if he didn't fuck around as much."

I had a listen to 'Wurdah Itah', and I don't know enough whether there's Zappa or not but it's a lot more focused. They have an actual sound they are moulding. Something Zappa has often been frightened of. From the little I've heard 'fucking about' is what he likes most.

That and bullying his musicians. The bit on the Synclavier was hilarious, like he really wanted total control but you can't bully a machine. Which is why I don't think he made much electronic music.

At least when Beefheart bullied his musicians they can point (with lots of distance) to the results.

have you read ben w's book?

On Zappa? No, never got round to getting a copy.

I've read it. He got to play Zappa some Derek Bailey, so I'm sure it was worth it!

This probably bridges the gap between Magma and Zappa nicely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W3Tnz1wNFM

From the little I've heard 'fucking about' is what he likes most.

Enh, there's a bit of truth to this in a live situation with his skits and such, but the vast majority of his stuff was tightly composed and arranged, and the arrangements varied based on his band at the time. (Whether songs about dental floss and penguins in bondage constitute fucking about is a matter of personal taste, but the arrangements are tight.)

Instrumentally, check out a piece like "Echidna's Arf" and how it varied from 1973 to 1974.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TVVIUV2QZ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB3lUn0gyjQ

I can agree with that, but I think both things can be true. like I'm sure something like "Billy the Mountain" is really tight on paper but for the listener it's a lot of whiplash and boredom. it doesn't have the sense of purpose that the longer Magma pieces do. his music is sometimes like a bad novel writing - "this happens, then this happens, then that happens, and that's it".

there's a reason Hot Rats so often gets singled out, it's the one where he doesn't just jerk off everywhere and actually focuses on the arrangements from start to finish (not coincidentally, there are very few vocal sections). outside of that very few of his albums feel coherent from start to finish and that very much seems by design.

One of the weaknesses of Zappa's albums is that there will be tracks side by side:

- "here's some 'funny' novelty that you'll bored with before the end of your first listen"
- "here's some bizarre complex atonal piece you'd have to hear 100 times while reading the sheet music to begin to understand"

I mean look at We're Only in it for the Money, for all the great songs there's still like 10 minutes of avant-garde bullshit which is a lot for a single LP

Well, I meant that the atonal piece may well be worthwhile, but if you put on the LP to listen to it, you're going to have to hear the tiresome novelty as well.

yea I don't wanna suggest that the avant garde stuff is all bad, I just don't like how 80% of his catalogue consist of ill-fitting pieces. Sheik Yerbouti is a good example, even the humor goes from MAD magazine to George Carlin to Andrew Dice Clay to Weird Al. I remember playing tracks for some of my buds when I was a teenager and when they asked to hear the rest of the album I was like "you probably don't wanna hear it sorry"

A lot more than you probably. Anyway you've consistently proven yourself to be a prize chump on here for years so who cares what you think.

― I Can't See Gervais In My Mind (Tom D.), Wednesday, December 22, 2021 3:09 AM (one week ago) bookmarkflaglink

yeah ok whatever

But I can't see how someone can hear this - recorded 3 years after Waka Jawaka - and not immediately think of Zappa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA-g77MUBDM

One of the weaknesses of Zappa's albums is that there will be tracks side by side:

- "here's some 'funny' novelty that you'll bored with before the end of your first listen"
- "here's some bizarre complex atonal piece you'd have to hear 100 times while reading the sheet music to begin to understand"

― Halfway there but for you, Wednesday, December 22, 2021 11:39 AM (one week ago) bookmarkflaglink

i’ve heard most of the zappa albums through 1981. this describes none of them

maybe i memory-holed some of it but honestly i do not associate zappa with atonality

Maybe you're thinking of unlistenability?

The other day I heard "Montana" by Zappa on the radio. It started kind of cool so decided to give it a try and made it about 15 seconds.

i’ve heard most of the zappa albums through 1981. this describes none of them

I'm thinking of something like the Ahead of Their Time 1968 live album where much of the time they're alternating between dumb comedy routines that might be amusing to hear once, and dense and abstruse modern classical compositions that I really have to apply myself to understand. A lot of Uncle Meat applies too. Sorry if it's not strictly atonal.

overnite sensation is a good album bro

ahead of their time is a rad document of a band that was doing stuff that no one else in the world was doing

But surely the most indulgent Zappa fan wouldn't call it a consistent listen? I don't think Frank himself would, that wasn't his goal!

But I can't see how someone can hear this - recorded 3 years after Waka Jawaka - and not immediately think of Zappa

I've never heard Waka Jawaka so you may be right on that score, I couldn't comment.

George Duke's playing on those early 70s albums is the key connection for me

I don't think FZ really looked at Ahead of Their Time as a major piece of work, more like a somewhat failed live experiment that was worth putting out 35 years after the fact

I love Uncle Meat, otoh

I always associate Zappa with Beefheart, and he suffers by the comparison.

I love the music of both but yah of course Don is "cooler" not even a contest. A real ass artist with a real vision. Frank ain't that lol.

I get why some people don't like Zappa.

What I don't get is why some people don't get why other people like him.

The only thing I can think of (and I personally of course have no prob with what people like) is that some people seem to worship him as a first name God. "Frank", a la "Jerry" or the like. Just a little too much reverential adulation. In fact, I think I've noted on this thread before, or maybe the Dead thread, that Zappa and the Dead might be the two most undeniably influential, even music-changing acts where I both totally get it and yet don't really want to hear it.

^Big second to this post.

With acts at that level of popularity, it becomes impossible to dismiss all the fans outright, but also hard to really care and find a way in when all the obvious entry points leave one cold. Too many other artists to pursue, too many Missing Links, DO U SEE?

Seems like this is especially a Zappa thing (particularly in comparison to the Dead), but I feel that Zappa is a fandom that makes it hard to be a casual fan (like me, who digs the '60s stuff and perhaps gets more than most out of Joe's Garage) because any interaction with the hardcore leads to "You gotta hear this...and this..." in an almost belligerent way.

Guy was genius, he didn't play prog rock or jazz rock he played Zappamusic etc.

I definitely see the Waka/Grand Wazoo influence on Magma

at the very least secondhand via Soft Machine who were huge Zappa fans, and maybe the only band Zappa viewed as equals

Never heard this last thing

"Grand Wazoo" bored the tits off me so, at the very least, Magma improved on it.

Actually, now I come to think of it, I have heard Waka/Jawaka, it's Chunga's Revenge I was thinking of.