Frank Zappa

[Twilight Shadow]

So what bands now-a-days you like than shadow?

[Shadow]

Current bands? Very few haha. Some of the Canadian East Coast indy bands have a neat sound going. Most of the bands I would pay to go see are bands that actually got their start 40 years ago.

I am going to see BB King live 0n the 21st.

[Gen. Volkov]

Way to twist what I said. I did not say that all popular music was bad, nor did I say that all obscure music was good. I said that the majority of popular music sucks, and that some obscure music is not obscure for the reasson that it sucks, it is obscure because the industry passed over it becuase it didn't fit the mould. The fact that the beatles were popular and good doesn't disprove what I said, it simply gives an exception to the rule. Not even though, really, because I did specify TODAY in that statement. The beatles are not a current band.

I don't think I twisted what you said at all. Actually, the quote out of context sounds better than the quote in context. Oh, and maybe if the Beatles were the only band that was popular and good, you might have a point about the exception to the rule, but I can list at least two dozen bands or acts that are or were both popular and good. Several of which are still around today. Of course since this is Zappa we are talking about, who's prime was around the end of the Beatles period, and when a lot of really talented groups were starting up, your specification of it being today is irrelevant. Don't forget, Deep Purple and Zappa were contemporaries.

[Genevieve]

A lot of the best Beatles songs were not their biggest hits at the time, and anyone who is interested in music would agree with this.
Pop hits are for people that don't like music. People that are interested in music go out and actively seek artists that they like, and are not just fed by popular radio.
In my opinion, Deep Purple wrote one incredibly famous riff, and I can't even name another song by them. I can say the same about Frank Zappa, but I know a lot of people that like music that like Zappa. I can't say that about Deep Purple. In fact, I can't even remember someone talking about Deep Purple before this thread. Sometimes I can't remember the name of the band that Smoke on the Water is by.

[Gen. Volkov]

A lot of the best Beatles songs were not their biggest hits at the time, and anyone who is interested in music would agree with this.

Eh, I think anyone who is "interested" in music as you say probably has bought into the idea that for something to be good, it can't be popular.

Pop hits are for people that don't like music. People that are interested in music go out and actively seek artists that they like, and are not just fed by popular radio.

I disagree. I like music, but that doesn't mean I don't listen to the radio. Michael Jackson was and is insanely popular. Doesn't mean he didn't have good songs. I could go on all day with crazy popular bands that had a bunch of monster hits, that still had good music. I just think this whole idea that you have to go off the beaten track to find good music is silly. Sure, there are a lot of hit songs out there today that are bad. But there are a lot of obscure songs that are also bad. The hit songs that are good are out there though, just as the obscure songs that are good are out there. I'm willing to bet though, that if someone did a survey, there were be more hit songs that are considered good than there are obscure songs that are considered good.

In my opinion, Deep Purple wrote one incredibly famous riff, and I can't even name another song by them. I can say the same about Frank Zappa, but I know a lot of people that like music that like Zappa. I can't say that about Deep Purple. In fact, I can't even remember someone talking about Deep Purple before this thread. Sometimes I can't remember the name of the band that Smoke on the Water is by.

I know people who like music who like Deep Purple. Oh, and another song by Deep Purple you might know: "Hush". If we weren't arguing about Zappa, I think several of the people in this thread would say they like Deep Purple.

[Shadow]

Well, since you insist on misunderstanding, let me make it clear what I meant to say:

Today, the majority of popular music that is heard on the radio is cookie-cutter, off-the-shelf crap. In the 60s and 70s, and maybe a little bit into the 80s, popular bands were (in general) actually popular because their music was good and the record industry was able to recognize that, whereas now, for reasons I cannot fathom, they pick up crap bands with the same sound. I supposed it is supposed to sell better or something. They tak less risks with interesting music an the result is dull music. Note that this has nothing to do with Frank Zappa or Deep Purple directly, it is just the statement that most modern popular music is crap. Not all, but most. The fact that the Beatles, Pink Floyd, The Who, The Doors, and many others are both popular and good does nothing to make this point any less relevent because they were all picked up many years ago and are not current bands, even though some of them still play - their or popularity is due to their success 30-50 years ago.

As a result of this low risk taking in the record business, bands that have a unique sound or a wierd theme generally get passed over (again, not always, but often. Note that I do not speak in absolutes when referring to general trends in popular music, and would appreciate if you stopped pretending to think that I did). This means that there are tons of small, unknown bands out there with really interesting sound that will never be famous, and if you actually want to hear good music today, you have to put in some effort seeking these people out, because while there are SOME good current bands, there just aren't eoungh of them to make for a well-rounded music experience.

On the other hand, people who are of the opinion that popular = good (usually starts to die down after grade 10ish) should feel free to tune their favorite radio station and rocks out to boring 4-4 drum beat #7 overlaid with repetetive guitar line #12 backing lyrics created by writing unit #3.


Now, to make it very clear. This is not to say that...
...Popular artists cannot have good songs. They can, they just have a lot less of them than the used to.
...Obscure artists are necessarily good. They are not, it's just to finda lot of the really interesting music today, you need to look somewhere other than the mainstream crap. Lots of obscure bands suck, but the gems are out there.
...Popular artists are always crappy. Some are good. Sometimes the record industry actually makes a good call, probably by accident.


I like Deep Purple, I just like Zappa more.

[Firetooth]

Volkov, Elvis didn't write his own music, nor was his music new, it was only new to the mainstream. The only thing he can really be thanked for is making rock n roll popular tbh.
Similar to Shadow's post:
Frank Zappa explains the decline of the music business
Warning: slightly rude

[Gen. Volkov]

Volkov, Elvis didn't write his own music, nor was his music new, it was only new to the mainstream. The only thing he can really be thanked for is making rock n roll popular tbh.

Never said he wrote his own music. As for what he did being new, perhaps it wasn't in certain circles, but the majority of Americans had never seen or heard anything like him. You have to remember, in 50s America, there was no counter-culture. The "mainstream" was pretty much the only culture there was. Anyway, as you point out, he did make Rock and Roll popular, which is really quite important. He set the stage for the Beatles, Zeppelin, and everyone else.

again, not always, but often. Note that I do not speak in absolutes when referring to general trends in popular music, and would appreciate if you stopped pretending to think that I did

Shadow, in your first post, you were speaking in absolutes. You don't like that I'm calling you on that, thus this big post stating stuff I've already said I more or less agree with you about.

[Shadow]

No, no I wasn't.

that almost everything on popular radio stations sounds the same and sucks,

Was my originial point. Note the word almost ^_^

Just because you hear hits more than some of the more obscure stuff doesn't mean the obscure stuff isn't better ^_^

Note the word some ^_^

There were no absolutes, and nobody but you interpreted my post that way. Surely you are able to interpret as far as things like this go, that when someone speaks about an industry as a whole they are referring to general trends anyway. Otherwise you are working under the assumption that I am an idiot, which I don't like. I'm pretty sure you just kept arguing because you had started and didn't want to concede that easily. Which is fine, just please do it without nitpicking and misinterpreting as that is just annoying.

[Blood Wake]

Volkov, You are ridiculous, you argue with people constantly on these forums. You definitely twisted around a lot of words throughout this whole convo and said a lot of stuff that music lovers, like myself, would definitely disagree with you on.

"I disagree. I like music, but that doesn't mean I don't listen to the radio." I like this, because Lucy was saying that music lovers don't listen to the radio and clearly you don't know what you are talking about.

I also think it's funny that you pointed out "Hush" as another Deep Purple song even though it's a cover of someone else, a better example would have been "My Woman From Tokyo." clearly you're well eduacated on all of this, please, tell me the name of a Frank Zappa song, or an album. Do you know what his band was called? I suppose not though since you think good music has something to do with "hits" in the music industry.

I could be like you, copy everything you said and give examples as to how wrong you are, but I know that would just lead to you spending a half hour replying to me by pointing out how your musically brainless mind thinks I'm wrong.

I'm sorry if you're offended by that, I don't usually fight people but you obviously love to. I probably won't post here again

[Genevieve]

"I disagree. I like music, but that doesn't mean I don't listen to the radio." I like this, because Lucy was saying that music lovers don't listen to the radio and clearly you don't know what you are talking about.

That's not what I said! I listen to the radio too! Just not mainstream radio, and it doesn't govern my music taste.

[Gen. Volkov]

Just because you hear hits more than some of the more obscure stuff doesn't mean the obscure stuff isn't better

The some, in the way that sentence is structured, is not referring to the idea of obscure stuff being better. It's referring to the number of obscure songs you might hear. Now, maybe you didn't mean it that way, but that is how the sentence reads. Thus the statement that the obscure stuff is better is an absolute.

Also, while you did say that "almost everything on popular radio stations sounds the same and sucks," you followed it with "I would argue that hits = crappy music, at least today." That is also an absolute statement Shadow.

I'm not trying to nitpick or be annoying, but I read the sentences as they are constructed, and while your intent may not have been to make absolute statements, that is how they read.

Volkov, You are ridiculous, you argue with people constantly on these forums. You definitely twisted around a lot of words throughout this whole convo and said a lot of stuff that music lovers, like myself, would definitely disagree with you on.

I didn't purposely twist anything around. I quoted exactly what people said and responded to it. As for people disagreeing with me... I thought I made it clear that I was in disagreement about certain things.

"I disagree. I like music, but that doesn't mean I don't listen to the radio." I like this, because Lucy was saying that music lovers don't listen to the radio and clearly you don't know what you are talking about.

Actually what I was disagreeing with her about was the idea that there are no good songs on pop radio. I may have misinterpreted that one though. And I didn't do a very good job of making my point.

I also think it's funny that you pointed out "Hush" as another Deep Purple song even though it's a cover of someone else, a better example would have been "My Woman From Tokyo." clearly you're well eduacated on all of this, please, tell me the name of a Frank Zappa song, or an album. Do you know what his band was called? I suppose not though since you think good music has something to do with "hits" in the music industry.

His band was called the Mothers of Invention. An album by him is Apostrophe. Anything else to prove my musical knowledge there? How about the names of the members of Led Zeppelin? Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, John Paul Jones, John Bonham. I knew that Hush was a cover, but Deep Purple still played the bloody song, and their version was quite popular, so I thought Lucy might know it.

I'm sorry if you're offended by that, I don't usually fight people but you obviously love to. I probably won't post here again

I'm not offended. Though I've obviously offended you. Sorry. I know I can be forceful in my opinions. It's not so much that I love to fight people, it's that I tend to say something when I see something that I think is BS. Like the idea that because something is popular, it's automatically not as good as something that's more obscure.

That's not what I said! I listen to the radio too! Just not mainstream radio, and it doesn't govern my music taste.

Actually, it appears we are both guilty of twisting Lucy's words. Sorry Lucy.

[Blood Wake]

No one ever said that if it's popular it's automatically not as good as other music

[Shadow]

Did anyone else read anything I said the way Volkov describes it? Because I certainly don't. I think you were just dragging it out to avoid conceding a point after you committed to what you said.

[Firetooth]

Does any of this really matter? This is just Volkov, as usual, refusing to concede a point, it's nothing new.