Well put Mr. Chimp.

As I had also stated on the "fans of Zappa" thread:

"Yeah, I don't understand anyone trying to push Zappa at folks on this board. Really, folks here are largely Shellac, Slint, etc... fans. Zappa may just not be someone's thing, and if it's not your thing, you're gonna dismiss it. There's no big surprise - if you don't like "comedy" music or dumb humor; you don't like jazz fusion; you don't like guitar solo wankery; you don't like giant, gruelingly rehearsed 12 piece bands with horns and keyboards; you don't like modern "classical" music; don't like music where every concept over the span of thirty years is linked to an inside joke you're not part of - you're not going to like Zappa! In fact, you're probably gonna fuckin' hate it! And why should anyone blame someone for not liking the jumble of a career that is Zappa. It has nothing to do with "not getting it"."

Linus Van Pelt wrote: It appears you haven't been here very long, but it's extremely condescending to go into a forum where people spend at least half the time talking about music, and assume that anyone who doesn't like Zappa doesn't know what a polyrhythm is. Some of us know what a polyrhythm is, appreciate what it is, maybe even like polyrhythms, but still don't feel that any piece of music that uses polyrhythms is automatically good. To assume that we "don't even know what the fuck a polyrhythm is" - that's pretty low.

OK, sorry if you are offended. But I really don't think you are taking in my whole point. What Zappa did with polyrhythms is similar to what Bach did with counterpoint. Lots of people can learn how to do these things, but some people have special abilities. I understand not liking what they do, but these abilities should afford their possesors a modicum of respect in a decent world. It has nothing to do with making something "automatically good". I mean, I have been studying music for many years and I still get lost trying to follow Bachs counterpoint and Zappas polyrhythms, both with scores in hand. Perhaps your understanding of music is much more advanced than mine. But for me, deciding whether or not something is "good" or not comes after understanding it, not before.

I am sorry if I have committed a breach of decorum. I realize this is not "my" forum (kvr is where I usually hang out). I just came to this site to ogle microphones and learn about them. When I saw the name "Zappa" on the right hand side of the screen. I then encountered some rather rude comments about a really intelligent musician that I admire.

I will now go away to a more congenial forum. Happy recording all

Well said Mr. Chimp, and thank you Geiginni, for the paragraph so nice it deserved to be posted twice - everything I was trying to say, better than I could say it.

I used to like Zappa when I was in grade school and had some appreciation for Dr. Demento and all that. Most of the appreciation I had for his efforts evaporated when I read what he had to say about the Velvet Underground.

I won't call him crap because I like him a lot as a person. In fact, I will say he is the most important joke-rocker of all time.

I felt I could easily state something objective like that, since I actually adore much of Zappa's work, minus alot of his most popular stuff. I do find it easy to see how folk could hate his stuff, and I don't begrudge anyone for it either, just as I don't begrudge my parents for not liking Coltrane.

I really like "Billy the Mountain" from "Playground Psychotics", the "Brown Shoes Don't Make It" suite from "Absolutely Free", "Dupree's Paradise" among his other more serious and thought-out works.

I really hate the "...Drowning Witch", most of "Apostrophe", "Man From Utopia" albums, and actually most of his mid-80's work. There's alot of CRAP in there - even for a devoted fan.

herodotus wrote:

Linus Van Pelt wrote: It appears you haven't been here very long, but it's extremely condescending to go into a forum where people spend at least half the time talking about music, and assume that anyone who doesn't like Zappa doesn't know what a polyrhythm is. Some of us know what a polyrhythm is, appreciate what it is, maybe even like polyrhythms, but still don't feel that any piece of music that uses polyrhythms is automatically good. To assume that we "don't even know what the fuck a polyrhythm is" - that's pretty low.

OK, sorry if you are offended. But I really don't think you are taking in my whole point. What Zappa did with polyrhythms is similar to what Bach did with counterpoint. Lots of people can learn how to do these things, but some people have special abilities. I understand not liking what they do, but these abilities should afford their possesors a modicum of respect in a decent world. It has nothing to do with making something "automatically good". I mean, I have been studying music for many years and I still get lost trying to follow Bachs counterpoint and Zappas polyrhythms, both with scores in hand. Perhaps your understanding of music is much more advanced than mine.

I'll agree with you on the "modicum of respect" thing, and I think if you read what I've said, you'll see I back that up. I also think that if the poll was "Does Zappa deserve a modicum of respect in a decent world?" the results would be a lot more lopsided. To me, the crap/not crap poll read, "Do you have to like this unlistenable soulless cerebral mess just because it was really difficult to put together?" and I said no.

I mean, it's fantastic that you sit down, score in hand, and listen to Bach or Zappa, and try to unravel the mystery. I mean that completely sincerely - that is something that really appeals to me. It has nothing to do with whether or not the music is good, though.

But for me, deciding whether or not something is "good" or not comes after understanding it, not before.

And I feel that you understand music with your brain and appreciate it with your gut. Ideally, I mean. Sure, a better understanding of music, in the cerebral sense, can deepen my appreciation for a piece of music, in the visceral sense. In this way, they go hand in hand. But the one dependent on the other? I say, no. Hopefully someone understands what I'm saying and can rephrase it in a much smart worder waying of talk.

I am sorry if I have committed a breach of decorum. I realize this is not "my" forum (kvr is where I usually hang out). I just came to this site to ogle microphones and learn about them. When I saw the name "Zappa" on the right hand side of the screen. I then encountered some rather rude comments about a really intelligent musician that I admire.

Hey, this isn't "my" forum either. It's owned by one guy, set up by another guy, moderated by a third guy, and they let the rest of us do this here. I didn't mean to accuse you of trespassing or anything like that. I apologize if I gave that impression. I was just saying - it's rude to be condescending in that way. I mean, apology accepted, but, there it is.

And there were some pretty rude comments before you, on both sides of the debate. I don't really feel like wading through 13 pages of vitriol to tabulate it, but I think the Zappa "haters" received more rudeness than Zappa did.

I will now go away to a more congenial forum. Happy recording all

I think, if you check out some other threads, you'll find it's a pretty congenial forum. At the same time, I guess it's probably not for the thin-skinned.

I voted CRAP and my vote brought this sucker into a dead heat, 32-32. Having taken the pains to read the entire goddamn thread, this brings me much joy.

Zappa was so far up his own arse.
Look in the Oxford English dictionary for the word 'Twat'...you'll find this self obsessed prick.

CRAP (isn't there a vote for something worse than crap?)

Wait a minute, what did Zappa say about the Velvet Underground? Because if he insulted them, I am gonna KILL HIM.

Crap. Only because I don't enjoy his brand of humour. I grew up hearing Zappa all the time. My older brother loves him, and he's a music director / high school band teacher / drum and bugle corp director. So I imagine there are merits to Zappa, because my brother generally has really good taste in music, and is quite intelligent about music theory.

I just don't get the humour. As a speaker on social problems like censorship he was really cool.

As for Zappa a genius. I've said it before, lets leave that to the scientists, doctors etc. Zappa was a minstrel. People throw the term genius out there on anyone who makes a bunch of records/ music they adore. Charlie Parker was the greatest saxophonist ever, period. Would I describe him a genius ? No. He was a minstrel. Paid to entertain the masses. Just in the last few months I have read Cobain, Robert Plant, Keith Richards, Ray Charles and Zappa are geniuses. Thats just rigoddamndiculous. Did they invent a drug to save HIV patients? Cancer? Alzhiemers? Migraine Treatments? No. They made songs. Yes they may have been profoundly written and recorded with polyrythyms or whatever, but I for one will reserve the moniker Genius for people who don't just entertain us, but help us. I could go on, but I think that is a good summary of my position.