# The Mothers of Invention



## Guest (Jul 31, 2014)

I came across a documentary on Youtube about how the band came to be formed and its ending. Interviews with Jimmy Carl Black, Don Preston and Bunk Gardner amongst others. Very good but it was split into 13 parts and I couldn't find Part 1. Grrr! Anyone seen it?

Here's a piece...

*Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention: In the 1960's*


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

I was heavily into them from about 1974 to 1978. I had a few dozen albums, some billed as the Mothers, some as Zappa and the Mothers and some as Zappa, but they were all pretty much by the same people. Toward the end of this time period, I began to notice that "We're only in it for the Money", ie., that Zappa appeared to be pumping out numerous albums a year, but it really seemed to be just a slightly different take on the same thing. I rapidly grew bored with it all, and I always did have problems with the comedy aspect, as the humour only seemed funny the first couple of times around, if at all, and it was so rooted in its time, that the music had, as a result, a very short life expectancy.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Zappa had some amazing music, if only he hadn't been such a pervert, especially since that came through in much of his music.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Zappa never progressed beyond his influences. He was a cheap imitator of much, much greater composers. His 'subversive' humor was a decoy for his mediocracy as an artist. The Velvet Underground accomplished greater things with their limitations than Zappa ever did with his 'talent'.


----------



## brotagonist (Jul 11, 2013)

^ I wouldn't care to deride his talent, but I know what you mean. And I also know what you mean about VU having accomplished greater things despite their limitations.

In defence of Zappa, I offer this album for consideration:










It's pretty decent. There are a couple of other classical albums (unfortunately somewhat marred by the lame comedy) and the jazzier instrumental albums warrant a second look (at least, I have been revisiting them, but I am not sure if I want to make any purchases  ).


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Zappa never progressed beyond his influences. He was a cheap imitator of much, much greater composers. His 'subversive' humor was a decoy for his mediocracy as an artist. The Velvet Underground accomplished greater things with their limitations than Zappa ever did with his 'talent'.


Zappa was not a mediocre artist. His compositions are of a very high caliber, and he wrote many beautiful melodies. He was also a brilliant arranger, record producer, bandleader, guitarist, and was innovative in video techniques and production.

Just look at the amount of talented musicians and artists he worked with. It wouldn't have happened if he wasn't respected. Musicians of the caliber of Jean Luc Ponty, George Duke, Kent Nagano, Pierre Boulez, Ralph Humphrey, Bruce Fowler, Vinnie Colaiuta don't work with mediocre talents.


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2014)

Florestan said:


> if only he hadn't been such a pervert, especially since that came through in much of his music.


He was? It did?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> He was? It did?


If you really want to know, google for the lyrics to his song, Dinah-Moe-Hum.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Zappa never progressed beyond his influences. He was a cheap imitator of much, much greater composers. His 'subversive' humor was a decoy for his mediocracy as an artist. The Velvet Underground accomplished greater things with their limitations than Zappa ever did with his 'talent'.


That is one very real "ouch" enough to make anyone squirm, and while I'm agreeing with you, I'm more than happy the heat for that is on you :lol:

There is, for me quite audible in all of it, "The Mothers" or later works, that incredibly sophomoric chip-on-the-shoulder resentment 'of the establishment' which it seems motivated near a lifetime's work either parodying, lampooning, or grudgingly playing off of 'the establishment' (repertoire) as the source of almost all his ideas.

This is to me the classic dynamic of a lesser creative who is instead of 'acting' and making something new, always reacting to something instead... a rather "perfect storm" of the most negative of dependent relationships, and a symbiotic and somewhat parasitic arrangement at best.

Since the man clearly had real talent in abundance, it is more than a shame the energy was wasted in reacting to and expressing, for a lifetime, a personal resentment, and all that very likely in reaction to something near to wholly imagined, to boot.

P.s. Having read further, I must confess to having little or no interest in how groups, any genre, get together to become an ensemble. Musicians meet, circumstantially, or they seek each other out based on hearsay or reputation, get together because they have an affinity and like goal, and there is little glamor or mystery about any of that. The Beatles / The Stones / Crosby, Stills, Nash / The Mothers of Invention, or the Philip Glass or Steve Reich bands, string quartets, and likewise to the present.


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2014)

Florestan said:


> If you really want to know, google for the lyrics to his song, Dinah-Moe-Hum.


I don't need to. I've been following Zappa for long enough to know what his songs are "about."

Of course, singing about 'perversions' doesn't entail being a 'pervert' (?) And whilst his lyrics are plain enough, is it also in the music?

There's a whole other thread on this.

http://www.talkclassical.com/33270-if-you-found-out.html

But I can tell you that if I found out that Zappa was a 'pervert' all along, I'd still treasure the three Mothers albums I have.

It's interesting that the first three respondents to this thread have chosen to report a negative experience. Thanks to starthrower for redressing the balance and brotagonist's second post. What I found interesting about the documentary was to learn more about the beginnings of the group, though it left unclear, in my mind at any rate, whether the The Soul Giants had talent before Zappa joined them? I much prefer the albums by The Mothers 66-70 to those by Zappa and his various lineups (with or without The Mothers tag). I didn't see him live until 1981, and I've only kept one of the later albums - _Tinseltown Rebellion_. While recognising that I lost interest in him over time, I still value _We're Only In It For The Money_, _Uncle Meat_ and _Burnt Weeny Sandwich,_ especially the instrumental pieces where 'perversion' is not so explicit.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> I don't need to. I've been following Zappa for long enough to know what his songs are "about."


I guess it would have been better had I said, "Too bad there are so many perverted themes in his songs." I really don't know what his personal life entailed. I do like much of his music and in the 1970s had Overnight Sensation and Billy the Mountain (think that was the album title). Don't know if I had any others. In fact, one of my favorite songs even today is a Zappa song, "I am the Slime"--such an excellent commentary on television.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

PetrB said:


> There is, for me quite audible in all of it, "The Mothers" or later works, that incredibly sophomoric chip-on-the-shoulder resentment 'of the establishment' which it seems motivated near a lifetime's work either parodying, lampooning, or grudgingly playing off of 'the establishment' (repertoire) as the source of almost all his ideas.
> 
> This is to me the classic dynamic of a lesser creative who is instead of 'acting' and making something new, always reacting to something instead... a rather "perfect storm" of the most negative of dependent relationships, and a symbiotic and somewhat parasitic arrangement at best.


That's only part of the story. And the parody songs are the only material "the establishment" ever paid attention to for the obvious reasons. They didn't bother to listen to the music. They only reacted to the lyrics.

And one could go back in history an accuse Socrates, Voltaire, or your artist of choice for the same thing.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

starthrower said:


> That's only part of the story. And the parody songs are the only material "the establishment" ever paid attention to for the obvious reasons. They didn't bother to listen to the music. They only reacted to the lyrics.
> 
> And one could go back in history an accuse Socrates, Voltaire, or your artist of choice for the same thing.


Since I pay attention to lyrics only well after several listenings, I cheerfully disagree. I hear the bitterness, and it is a nasty childish bitterness, in about every other note, and it is to me a major detraction from what was clearly an enormously talented musician, and 'what he made.' I'm making no call for or demanding 'prettiness' or a standard type of beauty from a lot of music -- while many another composer has made similarly aggressive, thumb their nose and blow raspberries, including spraying sputum, at the establishment -- without their works sounding like those of a nastily petulant and whining child, and that is what the majority of Zappa, 'in your face' or the more supposedly earnest works, sounds like to me.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

That's unfortunate that you hear bitterness in "every other note". And of course, you're describing your reaction to the music. I don't hear any bitterness in beautiful melodies such as Uncle Meat, RDNZL, Orange County Lumber Truck, Lumpy Gravy, Eric Dolphy Memorial Barbeque, etc.

If you don't like the music, that's fine. But your personal reactions are not intrinsic characteristics of Zappa's instrumental music.


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2014)

PetrB said:


> Since I pay attention to lyrics only well after several listenings, I cheerfully disagree. I hear the bitterness, and it is a nasty childish bitterness, in about every other note, and it is to me a major detraction from what was clearly an enormously talented musician, and 'what he made.' I'm making no call for or demanding 'prettiness' or a standard type of beauty from a lot of music -- while many another composer has made similarly aggressive, thumb their nose and blow *rasberries*, including spraying sputum, at the establishment -- without their works sounding like those of a nastily petulant and whining child, and that is what the majority of Zappa, 'in your face' or the more supposedly earnest works, sounds like to me.


In about every other note?

I'll give you credit that you've stuck to the task of hearing all the notes of Zappa's work to come to your conclusion, but what grim dedication: to listen to it all when every other note speaks to you of bitterness.

However, this thread is about the early Mothers, not the entirety of Zappa's work. I have no idea how this all sounded to the relevant generation in 1966, but by the time I was hearing it in 1970, I heard wacky, zany, fun, dissonant (though I'm sure I didn't know the term, I could tell it apart from much of the rest of the pop/rock my family listened to), and, almost certainly, forbidden/adult that I was sure no-one else in my class at school listened to.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

starthrower said:


> That's unfortunate that you hear bitterness in "every other note". And of course, you're describing your reaction to the music. I don't hear any bitterness in beautiful melodies such as Uncle Meat, RDNZL, Orange County Lumber Truck, Lumpy Gravy, Eric Dolphy Memorial Barbeque, etc.
> 
> If you don't like the music, that's fine. But your personal reactions are not intrinsic characteristics of Zappa's instrumental music.


Again, I beg to differ, but the element I detect I believe is palbable, real, and wholly not to be proven:

Also a measure of a great talent, some composers have such an innate musicality, regardless of whatever the intent, nature of the piece (humorous, earnest, religious, rebellious, etc.) that a good part of their more dominant personality traits shine transparently through all their works. -- this ability he does share with the greats, sans doubt.

It is that negative bitter aspect I've already mentioned which comes through throughout, between the lines, and I can not ignore what I sense. It actually has nothing to do with the notes, the form, the intent of a piece, so innate is it with those so talented... it is a constant and subliminal presence.

As I said, it cannot be proven, ergo argued, really, but there 'tis, a testament to the depth of his musical talent, apart from any aspect of the scores, which 'betrays' a very negative aspect of the persona -- to me.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Zappa was obviously not enamored with the shallowness of American culture, and yes, this frustration comes through in some of his music. And the results of a dumbed down, lowest common denominator factor that he railed against during his career have come to pass in a very big way in America. Hardly any serious and accomplished artists can make a living anymore.

Sure, a lot of this is due to the fact that our own technological advances have made it convenient to steal music, but there is also the ignorance and indifference of a society bombarded with commercial promotion to the point that only a tiny percentage of the citizenry is aware of anything of substance and accomplishment.


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Florestan said:


> If you really want to know, google for the lyrics to his song, Dinah-Moe-Hum.


Its called having a sense of humor, and so what of the subject matter? Sex is no less noble a subject for art than any other thing in existence.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> Zappa never progressed beyond his influences. He was a cheap imitator of much, much greater composers. His 'subversive' humor was a decoy for his mediocracy as an artist. The Velvet Underground accomplished greater things with their limitations than Zappa ever did with his 'talent'.


This is utter nonsense. Zappa progressed way beyond his influences. Unless, you can name who he happens to be ripping off here, pray tell?






And his 'subversive' humor was quite in line with other social and political satirists/commentators of the time (George Carlin, Kurt Vonnegut, etc.) and much like their gallows humor, when stripped away, actually had meaning behind it as serious as cancer. Its no different than literary devices used by others to make a point.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

What rock band hands out aleatoric sheet music to its players, written by its leader who is a composer (who knows how to write music) as seen here? And shows scores to its (home) audiences? (This clip edited out the complete showing of the score but you see a little of it. The actual video, "The Dub Room Special" shows more of Zappa's hand-written score which was shown on TV)).
If anything, we should be thankful for him introducing OUR WORLD (the modern classical world) to a wide audience who otherwise never would have been exposed or open to it.


----------



## Morimur (Jan 23, 2014)

Torkelburger said:


> This is utter nonsense. Zappa progressed way beyond his influences. Unless, you can name who he happens to be ripping off here, pray tell?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My word, the music is 'genius' and lyrics are... great? Eat your heart out, Stravinsky and Vonnegut.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

Lope de Aguirre said:


> My word, the music is 'genius' and lyrics are... great? Eat your heart out, Stravinsky and Vonnegut.


Yeah, way to move the goalposts. My post was in response to your statement that "Zappa never progressed beyond his influences." I posted an example that countered your argument and asked you to state who he was imitating. We're still waiting.

Or have you conceded the point and want to change the subject? And if you think Vonnegut is really that far off from Zappa lyrics, you haven't read much of him.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Torkelburger said:


> What rock band hands out aleatoric sheet music to its players, written by its leader who is a composer (who knows how to write music) as seen here? And shows scores to its (home) audiences? (This clip edited out the complete showing of the score but you see a little of it. The actual video, "The Dub Room Special" shows more of Zappa's hand-written score which was shown on TV)).
> If anything, we should be thankful for him introducing OUR WORLD (the modern classical world) to a wide audience who otherwise never would have been exposed or open to it.


Phew, thank goodness, with only a two-years' gap they picked up the slack just several years after the Leonard Bernstein Young People's Concerts with the New York Philharmonic stopped running (1958 - 1972)


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Addressing some points:

*1. Zappa was a pervert!*

Yeah, not really. He was, however, interested in bizarre social phenomena of his time, having referred to his songs as being anthropological on several occasions. A song like _Dinah-Moe-Humm_, though it isn't one of my favourites, is about radical feminist charlatanry, just like _Cosmik Debris_ is about modern day snake oil salesmen, just like _Heavenly Bank Account_ is about dishonesty in televangelism. To put it simply, Frank was interested in debunking and very often making fun of things he thought were ********, and cataloguing the strange things he observed, among which were, of course, strange sex acts. While The Mothers initially had a reputation for being shocking, both from their confrontational lyrics and musical style, Zappa's intent was less to do with that and more to do with presenting the world as he saw it and to not pull any punches - if nothing else he was honest. Whether it's entirely negative, as some people have suggested, or whether it's celebratory of weirdness, I don't think perverted (at least not in the sense that is meant here) legitimately comes into it.
*
2. He was a mediocre talent because I said so *_(AKA, the Lou Reed offensive)_

I mention Lou Reed not because of the comparison, frankly a nonsensical one, to The Velvet Underground, but because Lou Reed himself, who would later induct Zappa into the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame, said of him "Frank Zappa is the most untalented musician I've ever heard... He can't play rock 'n roll because he's a loser..." ...real classy, Lou. Smarten up, "he's not talented because he's not talented" isn't an argument, it's barely even a thought.

*3. He never progressed beyond his influences*

Barring the fact that I don't know what this is supposed mean, let's say it means that he never got beyond mere imitation of much more "developed" artists. I mean, after all, Zappa liked his Stravinsky, and he liked his Webern, and he liked his Varèse, which is why this sounds exactly like none of them, and I can point to many more examples besides. But perhaps I'm misunderstanding the argument, perhaps what you actually mean to say is that you've heard a very small amount of his work and assumed that's all there is to it? Maybe I'm being unfair, maybe you like to go through a composer's body of work chronologically? Me too! I recently started on Beethoven and so far all I hear is a shallow imitation of Haydn, I don't think I'll be going any further with it.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

PetrB said:


> Phew, thank goodness, with only a two-years' gap they picked up the slack just several years after the Leonard Bernstein Young People's Concerts with the New York Philharmonic stopped running (1958 - 1972)


Really? The same crowd? Rock and classical? Bobbie Brown Goes Down and Mozart, eh? Really??? In 72? Yeah, right.


----------



## Torkelburger (Jan 14, 2014)

One of the things I like in Zappa's music, both classical and rock, is the preponderance of complex unison writing.
Oftentimes, entire songs and pieces are scored and arranged where the melody is written with sixteenth, thirty-second notes, irrational groupings throughout but always scored for at least two or more instruments or groups in unison or octaves.
In addition to the two examples already provided, let me post some more.
A good introduction to his music is through the rock instrumental "Peaches en Regalia".
Note the unisons throughout the piece even in the beginning of the guitar solo. I also love the jazz chords in the beginning (triads are extended to include the sevenths on them).




A more complex example (mostly in a time signature of 5), again from 1983's Man From Utopia, entirely of complex unisons (16ths, 32nds, irrational groupings):




And from his classic song "Montana" at the 3:23 mark (one of the background singers doing these tough lines is Tina Turner):




And now an example of his signature technique from one of his classical pieces. The entire piece is one long melody, espressivo, yet very rhythmically complex. Note all the unisons of the difficult line. Instruments come in and out, in and out. A very original trademark in my opinion (composers usually just have these complex lines played alone). There is the use of a Stravinskian technique in the prominent repeated bass note (it repeats every 9 beats, no matter the meter change, etc., it always sounds every 9 beats). Outrage at Valdez. :


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Crudblud said:


> Addressing some points:
> 
> *1. Zappa was a pervert!*
> 
> ...


*
Granted, he was honest about society but he could have made commentary on radical feminist charlatanry without such perverse lyrics. Anyway, I did somewhere else in this thread acknowledge that I should not have called him a pervert since I don't know about his personal life--unless I could better remember what was in his book (The Real Frank Zappa Book), which I read a few years back. His book was a great read and basically he was a very intellegent guy. He made a lot of sense in most areas.*


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Florestan said:


> Granted, he was honest about society but he could have made commentary on radical feminist charlatanry without such perverse lyrics. Anyway, I did somewhere else in this thread acknowledge that I should not have called him a pervert since I don't know about his personal life--unless I could better remember what was in his book (The Real Frank Zappa Book), which I read a few years back. His book was a great read and basically he was a very intellegent guy. He made a lot of sense in most areas.


From all I've read, it seems Zappa was a pretty normal family man at home. He indulged in groupie oriented entertainment while on tour, which from my perspective, having experienced open relationships and so forth, isn't a problem provided all parties involved are comfortable with it, but ultimately that's a matter between said parties, not really good territory for public speculation.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> I came across a documentary [...] Anyone seen it?


I guess that's a "No", then.


----------



## 38157 (Jul 4, 2014)

I saw this. It's on an unofficial DVD, the name of which I forget. I like the interviews with the Mothers (extended interviews are included on the DVD), but some of the people they have on to talk seem quite useless, like the wide-eyed goatee man. He doesn't really contribute anything that couldn't be read online or in Zappa's own book. I feel the same way about the other contributor, with the dark frizzy hair and prominent teeth (don't mean to be derogatory in my descriptions, but I don't remember their names, although brief inspection of the video reveals Goatee Man to be Billy James (or Billy Goatee?). I like to hear Jimmy Carl Black talk. He's a real character, and is in his own way very articulate.

Re. the negative comments on Zappa I have read: don't really understand their relevance. Whilst you naysayers are wholly entitled to your opinions, I find your criticisms to be insubstantial, and your comments leave me with the same unpleasant taste that Zappa's music seems to leave you with. I see some of the negativity that you sense in Zappa's music in your very own contributions to this thread.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Crudblud said:


> From all I've read, it seems Zappa was a pretty normal family man at home. He indulged in groupie oriented entertainment while on tour, which from my perspective, having experienced open relationships and so forth, isn't a problem provided all parties involved are comfortable with it, but ultimately that's a matter between said parties, not really good territory for public speculation.


So basically he lived two lives. The one I won't comment further on because it would entail religious discussion and likely end up with a locked thread. Suffice it to say, there is a book that gives us direction on right vs wrong.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Crudblud said:


> From all I've read, it seems Zappa was a pretty normal family man at home. He indulged in groupie oriented entertainment while on tour, which from my perspective, having experienced open relationships and so forth, isn't a problem provided all parties involved are comfortable with it, but ultimately that's a matter between said parties, not really good territory for public speculation.







I remember reading in_ Life _magazine back in high school that Zappa allowed his kids to color on the walls of his home. When asked why, he said that it encouraged creativity. The guy's unbelievably cool.

_Hi!
Uh-huh... (Valley Girl)
My name?
My name is Ondrya Wolfson (Valley Girl)
Uh-huh
That's right, Ondrya (Valley Girl)
Uh-huh .
I know (Valley Girl)
It's like ...
I do not talk funny ...
I'm sure (Valley Girl)
Whatsa matter with the way I talk? (Valley Girl)
I am a VAL, I know
But I live in like in a really good part of Encino so it's okay (Valley Girl)
So like, I don't know_

I also remember going on a road trip and singing this in a Seven Eleven at about two in the morning at maximum volume with my friends. . . eliciting stares. . . and then going, "I ain't lip-syc-ing, Honey." Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

Blame Frank Zappa.

Where's Tipper Gore and the Mothers of Prevention when you need them?


----------



## BurningDesire (Jul 15, 2012)

Florestan said:


> So basically he lived two lives. The one I won't comment further on because it would entail religious discussion and likely end up with a locked thread. Suffice it to say, there is a book that gives us direction on right vs wrong.


Harry Potter?

...................


----------



## 38157 (Jul 4, 2014)

BurningDesire said:


> Harry Potter?


I thought it was "The Real Frank Zappa Book".


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2014)

Florestan said:


> So basically he lived two lives. The one I won't comment further on because it would entail religious discussion and likely end up with a locked thread. Suffice it to say, there is a book that gives us direction on right vs wrong.


Not The Bible then?


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Feb 26, 2014)

I try every now and then, but I don't get Zappa's music. It should work with me : I'm a rock guitarist who can read and write music, I like Kurt Vonnegut, I like the fusion of popular and "serious" music. But it doesn't work on me.
I don't like the xylos, I don't like the vocals although the lyrics are fun, I don't like the 70's sounds. The whole thing appears repetitive, lacking in tension and nuance, and not satisfying formaly.
I can get better post-Stravinsky music in "serious" music, and better rock music in... rock music. It falls flat on both side to me. I'm still hoping I'll hear a Zappa piece I really like but until now it hasn't happened.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Kilgore Trout said:


> I try every now and then, but I don't get Zappa's music. It should work with me : I'm a rock guitarist who can read and write music, I like Kurt Vonnegut, I like the fusion of popular and "serious" music. But it doesn't work on me.
> I don't like the xylos, I don't like the vocals although the lyrics are fun, I don't like the 70's sounds. The whole thing appears repetitive, lacking in tension and nuance, and not satisfying formaly.
> I can get better post-Stravinsky music in "serious" music, and better rock music in... rock music. It falls flat on both side to me. I'm still hoping I'll hear a Zappa piece I really like but until now it hasn't happened.


Therein lies the problem, you're looking for post-Stravinsky and rock, but Zappa only did Zappa. That sounds like a glib statement, I know, but the fact is Zappa rarely did anything straight and most of his work is highly idiosyncratic, so if you're looking for something to continue a line from Stravinsky or to just rock, I think you're looking in the wrong place.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Not sure what age Kilgore Trout is, but I like 70s music to sound like the 70s. And as far as fusing different schools of music, I can't think of anyone who did it better than Zappa. It sounds totally natural to my ears, and never half baked. And there's plenty of tension and nuance. Maybe you just have to keep listening? The music can grow on you. And there's tons of stuff to listen to.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Feb 26, 2014)

Crudblud said:


> Therein lies the problem, you're looking for post-Stravinsky and rock, but Zappa only did Zappa. That sounds like a glib statement, I know, but the fact is Zappa rarely did anything straight and most of his work is highly idiosyncratic, so if you're looking for something to continue a line from Stravinsky or to just rock, I think you're looking in the wrong place.


I'm not looking for anything. It just sounds that way to me, a mix of neo-classical Stravinsky and 70's rock and jazz-fusion, with a particular sense of derision. This doesn't mean it isn't idiosyncratic, but I don't find it very succesful, nor well-written. I think the idea of Zappa's music is better than the music itself.


----------



## Guest (Aug 4, 2014)

Kilgore Trout said:


> I'm not looking for anything. It just sounds that way to me, a mix of neo-classical Stravinsky and 70's rock and jazz-fusion, with a particular sense of derision. This doesn't mean it isn't idiosyncratic, but I don't find it very succesful, nor well-written. I think the idea of Zappa's music is better than the music itself.


Well, I guess it depends what you've been listening to, but it might sound like the 70s because a lot of it was written in the 70s - and if you don't like the 70s, why would you keep trying 'every now and then'?


----------

