Teenage Wildlife

IMPORTANT: Use your registry nickname as your username when logging in to Conversation Piece!


BowieTalk
   >> Views and Questions
Thread views: 16514 *Threaded Mode

Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | (show all)
AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/19/04 02:32 AM
LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new  

When we observe the history of Low and it's gradual rise to critical acceptance, it is not unlike another musical landmark - Igor Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring.

The Rite of Spring was released to the Paris music elite in 1913 on the back of two acclaimed ballets – Petrouchka and The Fire Bird. Initially, the ballet was met by a critcal slandering and near riots ensued at it’s premierre.

As we know, Bowie’s Low was released on the back of his two most successful albums in America. Although an initial audience was guaranteed (indeed it spawned a top 5 album and single), it’s critical reaction was likewise very poor.

Somewhere over the course of time, all of this changed.

20 years after The Rite of Spring, the New York Times announced that it was to the 20th century what Beethoven's 9th Symphony was to the previous one.

Now 27 years after the release of Low, it is still found ascending the lists of "top 100 albums of all time" despite thousands of other acclaimed albums being released in the interim.

Both pieces also live on in the form of other reworkings.

In 1940, Leopold Stokowski and Walt Disney selected The Rite of Spring for inclusion in the animated feature, Fantasia thus securing its place in popular culture. In 1993, Philip Glass (the world's most popular and reknowned living composer) chose Low for the basis of a brand new symphony and thus securing Bowie some kind of place in classical and mimimalist music.

So my question is - what other albums from the rock era have offered such a striking experimentation and inspiration as Low? Moreover, what albums were released to such a mainstream audience that they also secured a place in the nation’s top 5 album charts?

In the case of Stravinsky, questions were raised over the legitimacy of the music. Likewise, Side 2 of Low could not – and still cannot – be considered rock music.



Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

tonyinsf
(electric tomato)
03/19/04 02:55 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

LOW is great, but it lead the way to the more experimental album, HEROES.

Side two of HEROES is far more abstract and, I beleive, has more to do with iconic coding and redundancy more than there ever was on LOW.



--
"I don't eat meat" - Kwai Chang Caine



TheYoungDude
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/19/04 03:26 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: tonyinsf]  

Yeah, I tend to like "Heroes" a bit more too, although Low is amazing. There just seems to be a lot more experimenting and exploration, and it just comes off better.

The sisters fell back and said "Don't that man look pretty!"

TheYoungDude
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/19/04 03:28 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

In reply to:

history of Low and it's gradual rise to critical acceptance


I was recently reading a magizine called The 1001 Greatest Songs of All Time, and to my surprise, Sound & Vision was at number 32 and I remember Warsawa was in there somewhere too, around 200 I think.

The sisters fell back and said "Don't that man look pretty!"

White Prism
(electric tomato)
03/19/04 04:05 AM
Popularity's no contest new [re: Adam]  

This is trickier than I thought. I've no idea about the sales figures for these guys, but I've seen them all placed above Low in popular (i.e. 'voted for') charts.

Trout Mask Replica
Kid A
Ogden's Nut Gone Flake


Actually, I suspect that looking at popularity polls for this kind of answer is misleading because, needless to say, there were many votes 'squandered' on numerous Bowie albums above these that could otherwise have been spent on Low. Anyway, the three I've mentioned sold fairly respectably. Kid A is included on the grounds that the last millennium or century or whatever didn't start until 2001. . . Erm. . . How many units did We're Only in it for the Money shift?

In reply to:

Although an initial audience [for Low] was guaranteed. . .


What was its sticking power like? An initial chart position doesn't guarantee that it was enjoyed even by the majority of its buyers (i.e. ensuring its popularity). I think I read somewhere that a fair portion of Metal Machine Music (20,000?) was shifted in pre-release orders, though I guess not so many people would have bought it had they known.

In reply to:

In 1940, Leopold Stokowski and Walt Disney selected The Rite of Spring for inclusion in the animated feature, Fantasia thus securing its place in popular music


Hmm, I've often wondered about this. Mr Stravinsky didn't like the Disneyfied version (and neither do I particularly) but I wonder how much of The Rite of Spring's popularity rests on a 'false' version?

Now as for the Low vs. Rite of Spring comparison . . . I think the critical reception, although hostile to both, might have been different. Much of what happens in Low can be traced back to earlier, less accessible works by Neu, Kraftwerk, Eno and the like, while it appears that The Rite of Spring was with fewer precedents and is overall considerably more dissonant than Low. For example, Lester Bangs labelled Low as an Eno rip-off, though it’s hard to make the same charge against Stravinsky (at least with my sketchy knowledge of classical 20th century compositions).

I declare Metal Machine Music the winner!

Weave a circle round him thrice,
And close your eyes with holy dread


AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/19/04 04:25 AM
Metal Dung new [re: White Prism]  

That album failed to chart in both the US and the UK and was withdrawn by RCA in a matter of a few months. If it was indeed a genuine attempt at innovation (as opposed to being completed for contracrual reasons as legend has it), then we would have to liken it to John Cage and at that point, Reed quickly pales into musical insignificance. The aftermath: Bowie consolidated by getting "Heroes" into the UK top 5. Lou went on to create 'normal' albums which charted miserably. Metal Machine Music meanwhile failed to send a ripple through the music world.

Your other suggestions are better and will require further study. Radiohead is certainly one that sprang to mind for me....although I suspect that OK Computer was a large precedent for Kid A. I guess Tonyinsf might say that is similar to how Low was a precedent to Heroes.


Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

Edited by adam on 03/19/04 05:00 AM (server time).



SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
03/19/04 06:19 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

I have a huge urge to mention an Oldfield album or five, but it would piss off EJ too much... so I'll just say Trans-Europe Express (though I'm not sure how it charted).

KArt | Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/19/04 06:38 AM
Kraftwerk new [re: Sysiyo]  

According to my bible, Trans Europe Express had a turbulent chart success.

Initially it charted at US #119 in May, 1977 then 13 months later, it peaked at US #67. Strangely, it's UK peak did not occur until 1982 when it hit #49. This might be explained by the eventual single success of Computer Love/The Model which by then had became a dancefloor and airplay favourite eventually hitting UK #1.

Some of Kraftwerk's other albums faired considerably better: Autobahn (UK #11 and US #25), The Man Machine (UK #9 and US #130) and Computer World (UK #15 and US #72).

Mike EJ Oldfield had Tubular Bells which hit US #3 and UK #1. It's UK position was achieved post Hergest Ridge which it disposed from the UK #1 position three weeks after Hergest's release in 1974. It certainly outsold Low or probably any album Bowie has ever released.



Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

Emil
(stardust savant)
03/19/04 07:01 AM
Re: Kid A Dung new [re: Adam]  

Kid A was critically acclaimed when it was released. In terms of charts I don't know but radiohead never had as many followers as Bowie, did they? Nor are they as original - in my opinion it was a deliberate attempt to ape what Bowie achieved with Low, and I foresee that the album will be largely forgotten in a matter of decades.

The obvious comparison is Sgt. Pepper. Popular, yet groundbreaking - and causing furious protests at the time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emil's series of famous moments in film history:
Turn back, Sarah, before it's too late!


White Prism
(electric tomato)
03/19/04 07:17 AM
Invocation & Ritual Dance Of The Young Pumpkin new [re: Adam]  

Metal Machine Music wasn't a 'sensible' suggestion, silly billy, considering I knocked it earlier in the post. I'd be surprised if any of the albums I listed managed to outsell Low, since it appears that it is very rare for an experimental album to receive both popularity and critical acclaim, even if not both simultaneously.

Other channels that might be worthy of exploration:
Bjork - I've no idea which of her albums is most popular. Vespertine?
Pink Floyd - Piper at the Gates of Dawn, or maybe Wish You Were Here or Animals if you take into consideration the longer, largely instrumental tracks. The Floyd's albums seem to slowly build on each other, though.

Weave a circle round him thrice,
And close your eyes with holy dread


Earthling on Fire
(electric tomato)
03/19/04 07:17 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

In reply to:

Philip Glass (the world's most popular and reknowned living composer)


Glass's popularity may be one thing, but his renoun in music circles is actually very poor overall. Hundreds of living composers have more credit, for instance Rautavaara, Eötvös, Henze, Boulez, Saariaho, all of whom have enjoyed notable successes. I reckon "The world's most popular and renouned living composer" is probably Henri Dutilleux.
Moreover, I suppose there is a long list of artistic masterpieces that were not very well received initially, more than 2 at any rate, so draw a parallel between Low and Le Sacre du printemps rather than some other work? I mean, this their only common point and they do share it with many other works. Mahler's symphonies were consistently trashed in his lifetime, except the eighth, for instance, befor being acknowledged as maybe the most important symphonic corpus after Bruckner's.
The Sacre's innovations were mainly rhythmic, while Low was mostly influential in the area of sound (although it is far from being its only strength). Indeed, I suppose the type of emotion and imagery (including a vivd suggestion of Central/Eastern Europe) brought up by the sound paintings in Low is much more similar to many moments in Mahler's symphonies than to anything by Stravinski.

Wear your wound with honour.

AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/19/04 07:33 AM
Re: Invocation & Ritual Dance Of The Young Pumpkin new [re: White Prism]  

When I wrote my post I was gritting my teeth and hoping someone wouldn't mention the Lou Reed album, so my appologies.

In reply to:

[Earthling On Fire]
I reckon "The world's most popular and renouned living composer" is probably Henri Dutilleux.


I have not heard of him but thanks for verifying. I did read in the early 1990s that Glass was the most popular living composer. My friends were forced to study him at University so I was suspecting he must have been extremely renoun too....but perhaps not. What would you say holds him back from more critical acceptance?



Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

Frank_Solo
(electric tomato)
03/19/04 08:34 AM
Re: Invocation & Ritual Dance Of The Young Pumpkin new [re: Adam]  

Even though Metal Machine Music failed to chart and sounds like pain, it's been a big influence to electronic music, and I believe it's gonna influence even more music in the future. Actually, just a few weeks ago I heard a DJ mixing it with beats and stuff, it sounded great.

Laurie Anderson's Big Science also had a huge influence both on pop, and more experimental music. I believe Oh, Superman was quite a hit too, wasn't it?

Commercially, it didn't beat Bowie though.

Amen!

bowiefanpeter
(acolyte)
03/19/04 09:01 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

I'm surprised about some glaring omissions, some of you like to forget the 60's happened, don't you? I'll also throw in some others.

Electric Ladyland
Pepper/Revolver
Achtung, Baby!(there was mass confusion when this came out)
OK Computer(great album but I have low hopes on this one aging very well)
Mellow Gold/Odeley
Low
White Album(think about it!!!)
Bjork Debut
In Utero(this one gets better with each listen, and I've heard it over 100 times. On paper it should be a shitty record, but it just keeps coming back to me)

BFP




EJSundayModerator
(acolyte)
03/19/04 09:17 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Sysiyo]  

In reply to:

I have a huge urge to mention an Oldfield album or five


Personal feelings aside I would still argue that Oldfield wasn't half as adventurous as Bowie was. Oldfield came along in the typical 70s prog mould. He is far from Kraftwerk's future world techno ideology and much closer to bands like Yes, ELP, Gong or whoever used keyboards in abundance. Oldfield was clever enough to put more fun and folk into his prog-style, leaving the earnest things to the other hippies. But adventurous? Not really. I'll give him half a point for Tubular Bells as being the first album to score a major hit with music like that. Peace.

The adventurous thing about Bowie is of course that he had had loads of hit records before "Low" and then decided to become contrarian. People like Kraftwerk started off as being unconventional and it was when they turned just a little more commercial that their their chart success really grew.

So I think we should look for other artists that as clearly broke away from their winning formula as Bowie did if we want to really find the most adventurous popular album of the 20thC.

And I want to believe
In the madness that calls 'now'


Earthling on Fire
(electric tomato)
03/19/04 11:08 AM
Re: Invocation & Ritual Dance Of The Young Pumpkin new [re: Adam]  

In reply to:

I did read in the early 1990s that Glass was the most popular living composer.


"Popularity" sounds difficult to measure objectively, doesn't it? Anyhow, even if Glass is the most popular composer, I don't think he is the most popular AND renowned. I've just pulled out the 12/1999 issue of a music mag which asked a panel of 46 international musicians to name their top ten 20th-c. pieces. 7 journalists did the same. Out of the 530+ answers, Glass's name does not appear once. The only minimalist to be named was Steve Reich (once). The living composers most often cited were Boulez and Dutilleux (in that order).

In reply to:

My friends were forced to study him at University so I was suspecting he must have been extremely renoun too....but perhaps not.


That would have been University of Please Yourself, CA in Stanley J. Krammerhead III,Jr.,Occasional visiting professor of applied narcotics,'s course.

In reply to:

What would you say holds him back from more critical acceptance?


I think his work is usually reproached with being simplistic and poppish, a bit like Arvo Pärt's or Terry Riley's. The only person in the "serious" music game I've heard or read speaking favourably of Glass is conductor Marc Minkowski, who by the way is not at all a specialist of contemporary but baroque music. And in the three years I've attended classical concerts and opera performances, I don't remember any of his works being programmed in Paris, at least in its most important 6 or 7 venues.

Wear your wound with honour.

Strawman
(stardust savant)
03/19/04 11:09 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  


Amidst all Low's attributes, it's uniqueness via even a vocal track is nigh impossible to reproduce a worthy cover of without the outcome sounding complete shat.

Being that unique whilst staying within the realms of popular music is an outstanding achievement.

It's incredible that an album running so coherently, diversely incorporates rock & pop whilst exploring minimilism and/or/in the form of classical music.

I can think of no other album in the history of 'Rock', quite like it.



eraserhead
(stardust savant)
03/19/04 11:22 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: EJSunday]  

I think The Idiot is Low's main contender here. Major switch for Iggy. The Stooges were a winning formula. Iggy could have continued doing Stooges albums, but he didn't. The Idiot doesn't sound anything like the Stooges albums, and it has influenced more bands/artists than most records have. I mean, it was an influence on Low!




to preview or to not preview, that is the question...


xray_yak
(grinning soul)
03/19/04 11:42 AM
Re: Invocation & Ritual Dance Of The Young Pumpkin new [re: White Prism]  

In reply to:

The Floyd's albums seem to slowly build on each other, though.


I whole-heartedly agree, but Floyds work is a splendid example as contenders (experimental wise) to Bowie and Low none the less, though they got so much better when Waters left the band, imho.



DocFederfeld
(grinning soul)
03/19/04 12:18 PM
Re: Invocation & Ritual Dance Of The Young Pumpkin new [re: xray_yak]  

"though they got so much better when Waters left the band, imho. "

Sorry, xray_yak, but your taste is kind of strange ...



RabbitFighter
(acolyte)
03/19/04 12:48 PM
Re: Invocation & Ritual Dance Of The Young Pumpkin new [re: DocFederfeld]  

If you ask me, Pink Floyd should have been disbanded after Syd moved to his mother's house...

I'm the face of love
And this love burns cold



xray_yak
(grinning soul)
03/19/04 03:07 PM
Keh ? new [re: DocFederfeld]  

In reply to:

Sorry, xray_yak, but your taste is kind of strange ...


A Momentary Lapse Of Reason, Delicate Sound Of Thunder and Division Bell.

3 great albums and 3 good reasons why my taste might not be so strange. Waters is the idiot that ousted Richard Wright. Thank goodness Wright returned after Water's departure. I will forever maintain that Gilmour is Pink Floyd contrary to popular belief.





SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
03/19/04 04:31 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: EJSunday]  

In reply to:

People like Kraftwerk started off as being unconventional and it was when they turned just a little more commercial that their their chart success really grew.


Of course, Oldfield is really interesting because his first albums (Bells, Hergest Ridge, Ommadawn) that are hardly chart-friendly music (though I admit that they're somewhat clsoe to contemporary music, or at least TB is) were hugely successful, while his later, more commercial offerings (Platinum, Five Miles Out, Crises (that spawned the infamous Moonlight Shadow), Discovery) did notably poorer business in the charts.

KArt | Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

tonyinsf
(electric tomato)
03/19/04 11:58 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: eraserhead]  

THE IDIOT was recorded after LOW, and I consider it a sister album to HEROES, as both were recorded at about the same time (compare the covers!). Of course IDIOT does not sound like anything like Iggy's prior work. All the songs were written by Bowie, with some input from Iggy, but as far as I know, Iggy mainly came up with the lyrics for the songs.



--
"I don't eat meat" - Kwai Chang Caine



NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 00:18 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

You need to check out Frank Zappa's entire catalogue and get back to me in a couple of years. Then you'll know what innovation is all about.

...don't tell god your plans...

poorsoul
(acolyte)
03/20/04 00:36 AM
Heck new [re: xray_yak]  

In reply to:

I will forever maintain that Gilmour is Pink Floyd contrary to popular belief.



Maybe it's time to resurrect that "who owns Pink Floyd?" thread. Such illogical statements can't remain unchallenged.

Question Marks



AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/20/04 00:38 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: NoControl]  

As EJ said, we're talking about an album that went against a winning formula. Zappa NEVER broke into the top 5 of any album chart. He had one top UK 10 album (Hot Rats which reached #9 in 1970) and one in the US (Apostrophe which reached #10 in 1974). Granted he was an experimentalist, but I am not sure if he ever had as much at stake as Bowie when he released Low.





Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 00:55 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Adam]  

"As EJ said, we're talking about an album that went against a winning formula. Zappa NEVER broke into the top 5 of any album chart. He had one top UK 10 album (Hot Rats which reached #9 in 1970) and one in the US (Apostrophe which reached #10 in 1974). Granted he was an experimentalist, but he never had as much at stake as Bowie when he released Low."

Really? Then why did Apostrophe (') & Over-Nite Sensation go Gold in the US and Low did not? Why did Joe's Garage Act I once sit at #1 in Scandinavian countries? Why did the song Bobby Brown hit #1 in Norway & Austria? In your definition of the word "popular", many of the albums listed in this thread aren't. Popularity is hard to define. But regarding going against winning formulas and whether or not he had as much at stake as Bowie...well I think you'd be surprised just how much he did have at stake. Compared to FZ, Bowie is no match for Frank's revolutionary innovations and experiementations. Not even close.

Btw, Adam, how long did it take you to google the Zappa info? 5 minutes, 10...?



...don't tell god your plans...

Edited by NoControl on 03/20/04 01:01 AM (server time).



AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/20/04 01:11 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: NoControl]  

The book I reference provides US and UK chart details. But I must appologise for underestimating your obstinacy. Rather, I should have known that you could quote the chart placings in Scandanavian countries which must account for near negligible world wide sales.



Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 01:15 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Adam]  

Scandinavia? Maybe you should read the other countries that are there as well.

...don't tell god your plans...

AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/20/04 01:48 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: NoControl]  

....since you edited your post, thanks very much. Of course, when you start asking why Low (or most of Bowie's albums) don't go Gold in America, well I could say anything really. Perhaps they hate faggots over there?

But in more seriousness, I am doubting whether Zappa's (mass?) audience would have been as perplexed as Bowie's when he released Low. As far as I understand, Zappa evolved out of psychadelic rock where boundaries were already wider and where there was an audience of stoners ready to lap it up.

So No Control as the Zappa fan among us, I ask you to state the album that literally shocked Zappa's audience to the extent of Low but was as equally popular? Don't fucking tell me to check out his entire catalogue and get back to you in two years. White Prism earlier stated - Were Only In It for the Money - but that apparantly stalled at US #30 and UK #32. Next example please!




Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 02:21 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Adam]  

"....since you edited your post, thanks very much. Of course, when you start asking why Low (or most of Bowie's albums) don't go Gold in America, well I could say anything really. Perhaps they hate faggots over there?"

Or perhaps it wasn't that popular in the first place and this thread is absurd and pointless?

"But in more seriousness, I am doubting whether Zappa's (mass?) audience would have been as perplexed as Bowie's when he released Low. As far as I understand, Zappa evolved out of psychadelic rock where boundaries were already wider and where there was an audience of stoners ready to lap it up. "

Frank didn't have anything to do with "Psychadelia" at all. He was from the "Freak" scene in Los Angeles, not from "Flower Power" land up north in San Fran. His audience was immensely diverse. But I wouldn't call his audience exclusively "stoners". Some did do drugs, unfortunately. Frank didn't. And Zappa's audiences were continuously perplexed with each and every album he released. He went from the satirical/iconoclastic parodied stylings on Freak Out, Absolutely Free & We're Only In It For The Money, to the jazz-fusion excursions of Hot Rats, through the big band fusion dabblings of The Grand Wazoo & Waka Jawaka and so forth and so on. How could anyone not be perplexed with this selection?

"So No Control, I ask you to state the album that literally shocked Zappa's audience to the extent of Low but was as equally popular?"

Well, that's really easy, considering Low wasn't that popular, as it only did around 350,000 in the US.

Sheik Yerbouti
Roxy & Elswhere
Apostrophe (')
Over-Nite Sensation
One Size Fits All
Zoot Allures
Ship Arriving Too Late To Save A Drowning Witch
We're Only In It For The Money
Joe's Garage Act I
Joe's Garage Acts II & III
Shut Up & Play 'Yer Guitar
Shut Up & Play 'Yer Guitar Some More
Return of the Son Of Shut Up & Play 'Yer Guitar
Hot Rats


The above are just some of Zappa's records that come to mind that equaled, if not surpassed Low's popularity and perplexed Zappa's following.

"Don't fucking tell me to check out his entire catalogue and get back to you in two years. White Prism earlier stated - Were Only In It for the Money - but that apparantly stalled at US #30 and UK #32. Next example please!"

Why not, Adam? You'd have yourself a complete musical education with Frank's music.

And I guess you're not aware of the fact that peak chart positions do not necessarily dictate the greatest sales of an album or single. So, We're Only In It For The Money, qualifies.

...don't tell god your plans...

Edited by NoControl on 03/20/04 02:24 AM (server time).



AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
03/20/04 02:37 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: NoControl]  

A better post this time, but once again, you're obsessing terribly over US sales. Granted, Bowie was getting better US sales in 74-77 compared to other times of his career but we also know that the US usually means jack shit to Bowie. It is further exemplified when we start comparing him (a UK artist) to a US one. That whole problem comes up time and again with us, No Control. 130 million sales worldwide, remember?

Assuming Zappa WAS Bowie's creative and popular equivalent......how was their relationship with each other? I heard there was friction.



Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

Earthling on Fire
(electric tomato)
03/20/04 03:00 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Adam]  

I don't know about Bowie and Zappa but rumour has it that Zappa tried to lobby Verve out of signing The Velvet Underground. Does anyone know if that's true?

Wear your wound with honour.

NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 03:04 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Adam]  

"A better post this time, but once again, you're obsessing terribly over US sales."

You were the one who implied that his Scandinavian sales weren't important and that they were hence, "negligible". So naturally I was showing you examples of other stats.

" That whole problem comes up time and again with us, No Control. 130 million sales worldwide, remember?"

And you know why it's a problem? Because Bowie hasn't sold anywhere near 130 million albums. He might of sold 130 million singles and albums though.

"Assuming Zappa WAS Bowie's creative and popular equivalent......how was their relationship with each other? I heard there was friction."

Uh Adam, Frank Zappa was so far above and beyond Bowie in terms of just about everything that it's laughable to even think Bowie could surpass him with anything other than record sales (which Bowie has), that I would easily say Bowie wasn't anywhere near Zappa's creative equivalent - no one was or is! FZ has nearly 80 albums of material released to date. And to add to that, there's 70-80 albums worth of material that hasn't even been released yet!

As far as their relationship goes. There really wasn't one. On FZ's '78 European tour in Berlin (I think), Bowie wandered up to the front of the stage during one of Zappa's solos and asked Adrian Belew to join his band! He obviously accepted and weeks later he was on tour with David! Frank wasn't amused with this as it was evident when Bowie and Zappa's Band were in the same restaurant after the show. Bowie approached Frank and tried to mutter something but before he could, Zappa said, "Go away Major Tom"! He really didn't want anything to do with him at the time. But Frank eventually gave Belew his blessing to go and play with Bowie in the end. Zappa even parodied Let's Dance in a song called Be In My Video.

Here's the lyrics:

Be in my video,
Darling, every night
I will rent a cage for you
And mi j-i-nits dressed in white
(teeny-little-tiny-little . . . )

Twirl around in a lap dissolve
Pretend to sing the words
I'll rent a gleaming limousine;
Release a flock of
Ber-herna-herna-herna
Herna-her-nerds

Wear a leather collar
(Wear a leather collar)
And a dagger in your ear
I will make your nose smell the glove
And try to look sincere, then we'll

Dance the blues
(Oh yes)
Let's dance the blues
(We'll dance the blues)
Let's dance the blues
(We'll dance them very much)
Under the megawatt moonlight

Pretend to be Chinese,
(One-hung-low)
I'll make you wear red shoes
There's a cheesy atom bomb explosion
All the big groups use

Atomic light will shine
(Will shine)
Through an old venetian blind
(Venetian blind)
Making patterns on your face,
(On your face)
Then it cuts to outer space

With its billions & billions &
Billions & billions

Be in my video
(In my video)
Darling, every night
(Darling, every night)
Everyone in cable-land
(Everyone in cable-gable-land)
Will say you're 'outa-site'
(I say they'll say you're 'outa-site')

You can show your legs
(You can show the pretty legs)
While you're getting in the car, then
(In my red hot bright car, then I . . . )
I will look repulsive
([With my big ears and all])
While I mangle my guitar

Reen-toon-teen-toon-teen-toon
Tee-nu-nee-nu-nee,
Moo-ahhhh

Reen-toon-teen-toon-teen-toon
Tee-nu-nee-nu-nee,
Moo-ahhhh

Reen-toon-teen-toon-teen-toon
Tee-nu-nee-nu-nee,
Moo-ahhhh

Tee-nu-nee----moo-ahhhh
Tee-nu-nee----moo-wah-wah-wah-ooo

After all the close-up shots
Of you in bondage leather
They'll spray an alley with a hose
And we'll escape together, while we

Dance de blude agin
(I'm dancing the blues)
(Oh yes, we'll dance the blues)
Led dance de blude agin
(I'm dancing the blues)
(Sure we will)
Led dance de blude agin
(I'm dancing . . . )
(We'll dance them blues)
In de middle o' de alley

Let's dance your face
(Let's dance your face)
Let's dance your lips
(And dance your lips)
Let's dance your nose
(We can dance your nose)
And then we'll dance your sinus
MOO-AHHHH!




...don't tell god your plans...

Edited by NoControl on 03/20/04 03:09 AM (server time).



bowiefanpeter
(acolyte)
03/20/04 06:16 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

I can only keep on thinking one thing during this entire thread.

Why is the LOW album never mentioned outside the Bowie legend?

People here call it the greatest album of the 20th century. Looking at it closer, outside David articles, and being namechecked a couple time by Trent, I don't think I have ever seen it once mentioned as being an independantly strong piece of music. It's not even considered amongst Eno's creme de la creme of albums he's worked on.

Maybe people still have to come around to the album, or they never think Bowie could be a serious composer.

I, personally, love this album. Just what am I missing?

BFP



th0mas
(acolyte)
03/20/04 07:41 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: NoControl]  

hell - this is fucking funny... i did not listen much to zappa so far, but what i heard i liked. i think he tried a lot - probably way more than bowie - but his "mainstream" part (which is probably what i heard) never sounds like being a serious attempt of creating something new but rather like trying around and playing. Zappa and Bowie seem to have two completly different approaches. did zappa ever sink together with his ship like bowie did? he seemed to be beyond those common definitions of success - at least i think he had much less impact than a ziggy stardust - and more respectless towards everything, which probably resulted in people seeing him much more as a weirdo, who was allowed to do a lot without getting harmed by the result, while bowie, who had a mainstream name, fall flat on his face with every wrong step.

did this show my opinion towards the headlining question?! perhaps i don't have an opinion at all on this topic...

"Have you tried... not being a mutant?"

SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
03/20/04 02:34 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: th0mas]  

My only opinion thus far is that I was fool to forget that NoControl can't be wrong.

KArt | Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

Marquis
(acolyte)
03/20/04 02:45 PM
The Problem With Zappa new [re: NoControl]  

Is that Comedy Rock gets old in about ten minutes. Yes, I realized he was on a bit of a different plane from Moldy Peaches, but still, I can usually only laugh at goofy song lyrics once or twice, and after that, I get bored. Unless, of course, its MC Paul Barman.

As for this question, I'd have to go White Album.

Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
03/20/04 04:42 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Sysiyo]  

I have missed NOcontrol, he is always so serious and RIGHT!!!

with a good head for facts and figures, which he always used to prove his point

I believe in the Power of Good
I Believe in the State of Love
I Will Fight For the Right to be Right
I Will Kill for the Good of the Fight for the Right to be Right


CAwesome
(kook)
03/20/04 05:08 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: pablopicasso]  

I bet you he researches into arguments in advance so he's ready at any moment.

I'll be appearing LIVE in Toronto April 1st. Sure, it's a David Bowie show but you're all coming to see me. More importantly, you're coming to see me in my awesome new pants.

pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
03/20/04 05:21 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: CAwesome]  

Probably, he should learn to relax and take it easy.

I believe in the Power of Good
I Believe in the State of Love
I Will Fight For the Right to be Right
I Will Kill for the Good of the Fight for the Right to be Right


NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 07:55 PM
Re: The Problem With Zappa new [re: Marquis]  

"Is that Comedy Rock gets old in about ten minutes. Yes, I realized he was on a bit of a different plane from Moldy Peaches, but still, I can usually only laugh at goofy song lyrics once or twice, and after that, I get bored. Unless, of course, its MC Paul Barman."

You think Zappa is strictly "Comedy Rock"? ROTF. You need to do your homework.

...don't tell god your plans...

kipt
(kook)
03/20/04 08:10 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: tonyinsf]  

In reply to:

but it lead the way to the more experimental album, HEROES.


I would actually go so far as to say that Low was more experimental than Heroes. I mean, the first side of low blends a lot of different sounds, treatments, and styles, to a very brilliant effect. "Heroes" I find is almost more either an extension of this, or more straightforward dark synthy rock. As for the second side, I'd say that "Heroes" was more of a "typical" experimental album. I mean, Low had very catchy yet completely non-pop side, and I think the way it managed to make itself both accessible and completely intriguing and different is where it's 'experimenal-ness' lies.



HotJareth
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/20/04 08:13 PM
Re: The Problem With Zappa new [re: NoControl]  

Look, Matt does more homework than anyone. Don't demean him.

A LOT of what Zappa was about was comedy. And a lot of it is only good for one yuk.

Once you extract the lyrics from the music, much of it is really only noodling...phish does a pretty impressive recreation sometimes, if that's any indication.

As far as his "orchestral" stuff goes, it's only listenable if you present it in an arena that allows a visual component, otherwise it's completely indecipherable.



NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 09:19 PM
Re: The Problem With Ignorance new [re: HotJareth]  

You don't know what you're talking about either, unfortunately.

...don't tell god your plans...

HotJareth
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/20/04 09:22 PM
Re: The Problem With Ignorance new [re: NoControl]  

oh shut the fuck up
i've heard enough zappa to form my own opinion
i happen to like him
but i also like weird al on certain occasions
and i certainly aint gonna try to write him in on my election ballot



NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 09:25 PM
Re: The Problem With Ignorance new [re: HotJareth]  

I'll shut the fuck up when you start talking some sense.

...don't tell god your plans...

HotJareth
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/20/04 09:36 PM
Re: The Problem With Ignorance new [re: NoControl]  

so tell me why i'm wrong
instead of just saying i'm wrong
you want to debate?
state your case, twat




NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 09:38 PM
Re: The Problem With Ignorance new [re: HotJareth]  

I already have. And if you think he's "Comedy Rock" or like Weird Al, you've shown me just how much you're wrong.

...don't tell god your plans...

HotJareth
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/20/04 09:45 PM
Re: The Problem With Ignorance new [re: NoControl]  

oh piss off
weird al is one thing
zappa is another
you obviously take things too seriously
which is why you are worthless so fuck off



NoControl
(kook)
03/20/04 09:51 PM
Re: The Problem With Ignorance new [re: HotJareth]  

No, not at all. I'm just trying to show you why you're ignorant. I've got a sense of humour. If I didn't, I wouldn't be listening to Frank's music. In fact, I think many Bowie fans take his music way too seriously and are quite cold, especially on this board. And it's interesting to see that all you can do is to attempt to insult me. I find that funny.

...don't tell god your plans...

poorsoul
(acolyte)
03/20/04 10:31 PM
Monster new [re: Marquis]  

In reply to:

As for this question, I'd have to go White Album.



Which raises the question that should've been asked right from the start: how is "experimentation" to be defined? The Beatles certainly was a break away from their previous albums and did contain some experimental elements (chiefly Revolution 9) but, on the whole, it featured more conventional songs, like Revolution 1. Does experiementation necessarily entail the introduction of new instruments and production techniques or is more about how the songs are developed and the style of the lyrics (where they exist)?

Question Marks



Marquis
(acolyte)
03/20/04 11:23 PM
Give People What They Want in Lethal Doses new [re: poorsoul]  

NoControl, the reason no one likes you is because you address them like they were 3rd graders. If you can't even make the effort to show a modicum of respect to your superiors, then we'll never get around to reading more than a few words of your posts. Your tendency to twist words and definitions to suit your own ends is obnoxious, too. Basically, it seems like you want to see things very black and white, i.e. there is what you say is truth and there is what anyone else says. If you are unable or unwilling to accept that there are varying degrees of 'truth' influenced by various opinions, then you ought to steer clear of discussion forums and other socially interactive places. Its for your own good.

Now, back to the question: It also occurred to me, poorsoul, that the White Album may not fit the bill that Adam was looking for since I believe (and I may be wrong) that it was quite popular upon release. The whole notion of 'experimental music' and, by extension, experimentation in music is a little foggy to me.

Take, for example, the Experimental Music section of my store. Its got the mainstays, mostly noise stuff, that you'd expect: Muslimgauze, Whitehouse, and Merzbow out the ass. But it also has guitar noodlers like Buckethead, psychedelic acts like Acid Mothers Temple or Jackie O Motherfucker, even a CD that's just a recording of melting ice. What is it the common thread that makes this music 'experimental'?

And what about a release like the Flaming Lips pulled with Transmissions From the Satellite Heart or even In a Priest Driven Ambulance? For a group known for its messy drugged out noisewashes to start writing catchy pop songs is, in my book, as big as risk artistically as an artist which goes the other way.

I guess what I'm trying to babble out is that while I certainly have respect for artists who work to be innovative, at the end of the day, all I care about is the results. A piece of music has to be good on its own merits, not because its groundbreaking or new or risky, but because its a good piece of music. I don't feel its right to necessarily give more credit to someone like Autechre or Sonic Youth than to The Shins or The Apples in stereo. Good is good. Period.

Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


NoControl
(kook)
03/21/04 00:27 AM
Re: Give People What They Want in Lethal Doses new [re: Marquis]  

"NoControl, the reason no one likes you is because you address them like they were 3rd graders.

No, it's because 90% of the time I'm right about what I debate about. And many people can't stand it (I've seen this all my life) It's called jealousy, I'm afraid. I don't address people like third graders. If I did, I would've be the one who started throwing insults around. But I didn't and never have. So why are you giving me the lecture? If you can't take the fact that David Bowie isn't Lord God Of The Earth, that's your problem.

"If you can't even make the effort to show a modicum of respect to your superiors, then we'll never get around to reading more than a few words of your posts"

Superiors? Good one, I like that.

"Your tendency to twist words and definitions to suit your own ends is obnoxious, too."

Twist words and definitions? Obnoxious? I don't do that. But, I guess facts and opinions are obnoxious then. LOL

"Basically, it seems like you want to see things very black and white, i.e. there is what you say is truth and there is what anyone else says."

And you're wrong again. You are assuming things about me when you know nothing about me.

" If you are unable or unwilling to accept that there are varying degrees of 'truth' influenced by various opinions, then you ought to steer clear of discussion forums and other socially interactive places. Its for your own good".

Thanks for giving me your philosophy lesson for the day, Mommy.

All I'm doing is answering Adam's question of whether or not Low is the most popular experimental album of the 20th Century? And I've shown why it isn't. Others in this thread have too. What part of that don't you understand?

...don't tell god your plans...

Marquis
(acolyte)
03/21/04 02:13 AM
I love you but i've chosen darkness new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

I don't address people like third graders. If I did, I would've be the one who started throwing insults around.


So does this mean you're in the practice of throwing insults towards 10 year olds? Cause most people, I think, would tend more to address them as if their opinions may be cute, but aren't ultimately truly valid. You know, in a mock-patient superior sort of way. Such as:

In reply to:

No, it's because 90% of the time I'm right about what I debate about. And many people can't stand it (I've seen this all my life) It's called jealousy, I'm afraid.


And see if you can't even muster the talent to cloak your reeking self-importance in some sort of attempt at humor, then what use are you?
Besides, isn't the above pretty much a textbook example of what I said about your black/white view of the world?

In reply to:

If you can't take the fact that David Bowie isn't Lord God Of The Earth, that's your problem.


I'd like you to link me to the posts I've made where I said he was anything of the sort. Or, more acurately, I'd like to pry your smug mouth off of your own smug asshole and pay attention to what's going on around you. Douche.


Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
03/21/04 02:20 AM
Re: Give People What They Want in Lethal Doses new [re: NoControl]  

You take life way too seriously.

I believe in the Power of Good
I Believe in the State of Love
I Will Fight For the Right to be Right
I Will Kill for the Good of the Fight for the Right to be Right


RabbitFighter
(acolyte)
03/21/04 06:43 AM
Re: Give People What They Want in Lethal Doses new [re: Marquis]  

In reply to:

there is what you say is truth and there is what anyone else says


He should watch his back. Last time I checked, TW:rs with similar attitudes have ended up dead...

I'm the face of love
And this love burns cold



diamondogz74
(stardust savant)
03/21/04 06:52 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20thC? new [re: Adam]  

When i first viewed TMWFTE on DVD,There is a bonus feature from the director Nicolas Roeg.

In which he states this album Low was Bowies original soundtrack to the film TMWFTE.

This I do not believe,What say you?.

________________________
Humming Rheingold
We scavenge up our clothes

________________________
London Bye Ta-Ta...

EuropeanCanon
(crash course raver)
03/21/04 09:01 AM
I say jump! new [re: diamondogz74]  

There is a certain element of truth to this. Roeg originally rejected Bowie's intended score for TMWFTE, of which only a reworked Subterraneans made it onto Low - although it has been rumoured that Weeping Wall also evolved in 1975. In describing Low as Bowie's original soundtrack, Roeg has probably been slightly misled after Bowie sent a copy of the album to Roeg, soon after his rejection, with a note from Bowie implying that it was to have been the soundtrack to the film.

Ich heisse super fantastische

diamondogz74
(stardust savant)
03/21/04 09:36 AM
Re: I say jump! new [re: EuropeanCanon]  

Thank you very much for that.

Sounds like our Mr Bowie again eh?

BTW,In the film TMWFTE there is an album on sale in that store Newton visits,Its called "The Visitor",I wonder was this just a film prop or did anything ever come of it?.

______________________
Humming Rheingold
We scavenge up our clothes

______________________
London Bye Ta-Ta...











kipt
(kook)
03/21/04 10:46 AM
Re: I say jump! new [re: diamondogz74]  

Well, all I can say as an aside is that The Visitor was also a rumoured bootleg of Bowie's original soundtrack to MWFTE discussed in the book "David Bowie: An Illustrated Record".The bootleg, however, is generally considered not to exist.



stevetobias
(grinning soul)
03/21/04 12:13 PM
The Berlin era was a musical renaissance new [re: Adam]  

To me, the whole period was like a musical renaissance -- a German high renaissance.
Kraftwerk, Iggy Pop, Brian Eno, Cluster, Bowie, Fripp, etc
Philip Glass made a note in his Heroes Symphony liner that not only did the era serve as a canon for all modern music, but so much so that it deserved direct attention (by himself), as any appropriate work of art would in the past.
I don't know though -- maybe it's just my taste. I'm sure someone could just as easily call the Led Zeppelin era some kind of blues/rock renaissance, or the Elvis to Beatles transition one as well.
But, I'll argue this is more important. Right before the "Berlin era" musicians were starting to truly starting to see music objectively (with much thanks to the synthesizer) -- as amplitudes of sound frequencies over time. Bands could function entirely in studios, instruments could be imitated, etc. -- music was limitless. One can see this from Eno's pre-Berlin work, Pink Floyd, Kraftwerk, Tangerine Dream, etc. The Berlin era was just the complete collecting and mastering of this musical perspective -- applying and using it perfectly to preexisting techniques. Low is particularly amazing, as it used blues and rock instrumental techniques as some sort of guide to apply this perspective. No respect is paid toward the lyrics as a song normally would, no respect is paid towards the band or their instruments -- it is pure music -- layered, cutup, etc. A great example is that reverbed snare sound, which is still copied up to today (thanks to Visconti -- who deserves much more credit as a producer).

Of course, that whole perspective gradually dies down even within Bowie and Eno, and music goes back to some poorly abstracted format of that successful era (80s synth pop), and things go back to normal.

I don't know, that's what I think at least -- it is kind of abstract.

Edited by stevetobias on 03/21/04 12:13 PM (server time).



bowiefanpeter
(acolyte)
03/21/04 01:19 PM
Re: The Berlin era was a musical renaissance new [re: stevetobias]  

Was the filming of the movie and soundtrack work before or after the S2S album and tour? I surprised that I cannot remember, but sometihng is not adding up for me.

I was also under the impression that DB was too messed up to deliver the film soundtrack. His then management may have been a problem as mcu as anything that was going up his nose.

BFP



GodlessWonder
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/21/04 01:26 PM
Anyway, enough of that new [re: bowiefanpeter]  

Personally, I think that The Fragile by NIne Inch Nails should be classed as an experimental masterpiece. Two disks of clever, tourtured music. Its amazing and marks an important departure for the band as a whole. However, I agree with No Control (despite his lack of humour) that Zappa made some great experimental music - especially Joe's Garage.

At least I'm not a whore

diamondogz74
(stardust savant)
03/21/04 02:58 PM
Re: I say jump! new [re: kipt]  

Yes i've got that very superb book.

Its just that the cover of "The Visitor" and its concept would have made a brilliant soundtrack.

Still who knows?,It might one day come about ( wishful thinking i know).

Thank you very much.

______________________
Humming Rheingold
We scavenge up our clothes

______________________
London Bye Ta-Ta...











SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
03/21/04 05:18 PM
Hear hear, well spoken Marquis! new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

All I'm doing is answering Adam's question of whether or not Low is the most popular experimental album of the 20th Century? And I've shown why it isn't. Others in this thread have too. What part of that don't you understand?


Speaking of twisting words: Marquis never contradicted that, did he? In fact, he spoke solely of your arguing habits, and of what can really be considered 'experimental'. No mention of Bowie in the entire post.

KArt | Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

Chichikov
(cracked actor)
03/21/04 06:47 PM
Love to say Da Da new [re: Adam]  

The Beach Boys' Smiley Smile has experimental (She's Going Bald, Little Pad) and popular (Heroes and Villains, Good Vibrations) songs. .Brian Wilson will be releasing a live album of his recent Smile concerts this fall. Hopefully he'll finally release the Smile sessions because it's really about time.

Smiley Smile wasn't very popular when it came out but from what I've downloaded from the Smile sessions, I've heard some wildly experimental stuff (Mrs. O'Leary's Cow, George Fell Into His French Horn). Based on the popularity of "Good Vibrations" and strong critical praise, Smile could've sold pretty well.

Edit - The only Zappa worth listening to is his fusion stuff without the Mothers, like Hot Rats because the rest just isn't very good

Cover your balls cuz we swing kung fu

Edited by Chichikov on 03/21/04 06:57 PM (server time).



poorsoul
(acolyte)
03/21/04 08:05 PM
Guest new [re: GodlessWonder]  

In reply to:

Personally, I think that The Fragile by NIne Inch Nails should be classed as an experimental masterpiece. Two disks of clever, tourtured music.



Except it isn't popular, so falls outside the terms of reference for this thread.

Question Marks



Marquis
(acolyte)
03/21/04 08:07 PM
Get Ready to Smile new [re: Chichikov]  

Well according to this, Brian Wilson plans on officially releasing Smile sometime this fall. I am not the hugest Beach Boys fan in the world, but still this is pretty damned cool.

Speaking of unreleased stuff (and the White Album), has anyone else had a chance to hear Dangermouse's Grey Album? I heard a burn of it, and ordered a copy from Ebay today. Its not great, per se, but its definitely an interesting listen, and a cool little collector's item.

Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


poorsoul
(acolyte)
03/21/04 08:09 PM
Manic new [re: NoControl]  

Marquis:
"Basically, it seems like you want to see things very black and white, i.e. there is what you say is truth and there is what anyone else says."

Translation: you think you're right all the time and that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

No Control:
"And you're wrong again."

Does that not prove the argument?

Question Marks



NoControl
(kook)
03/22/04 00:12 AM
Re: I love you but i've chosen darkness new [re: Marquis]  

"So does this mean you're in the practice of throwing insults towards 10 year olds?"

No but 11 year olds are the exception!

"Cause most people, I think, would tend more to address them as if their opinions may be cute, but aren't ultimately truly valid. You know, in a mock-patient superior sort of way."

Again. A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

"And see if you can't even muster the talent to cloak your reeking self-importance in some sort of attempt at humor, then what use are you?"

You missed the point completely. But then again, living up to your own inane standards is what I need to do!

"Besides, isn't the above pretty much a textbook example of what I said about your black/white view of the world?"

Well, it's good to see you're not judgemental! And guess what? You're wrong about me yet again.

"I'd like you to link me to the posts I've made where I said he was anything of the sort. Or, more acurately, I'd like to pry your smug mouth off of your own smug asshole and pay attention to what's going on around you. Douche."

You try to lecture me about my wrong doings and my unawareness of what's going around me but you state the above. Can anyone say hypocrite?


...don't tell god your plans...

Edited by NoControl on 03/22/04 00:42 AM (server time).



NoControl
(kook)
03/22/04 00:13 AM
Re: Give People What They Want in Lethal Doses new [re: pablopicasso]  

LOL

...don't tell god your plans...

NoControl
(kook)
03/22/04 00:15 AM
Re: Give People What They Want in Lethal Doses new [re: RabbitFighter]  

Really? Oh god!? Where should I hide then? The cellar? The basement?

...don't tell god your plans...

NoControl
(kook)
03/22/04 00:17 AM
Re: Hear hear, well spoken Marquis! new [re: Sysiyo]  

"Speaking of twisting words: Marquis never contradicted that, did he? In fact, he spoke solely of your arguing habits, and of what can really be considered 'experimental'. No mention of Bowie in the entire post."

Of course he did and of course I mentioned Bowie. Trying reading once in awhile - it helps. There's 26 letters in the alphabet too....

...don't tell god your plans...

Edited by NoControl on 03/22/04 00:19 AM (server time).



NoControl
(kook)
03/22/04 00:38 AM
Re: Manic new [re: poorsoul]  

Poorsoul:

~ the cost of your brain: 10 cents
~ the cost of your negligible attitude: 20 cents
~ the cost of you needing to get a blowjob: 30 cents

~ the cost of me ROTFLMFAO at the fact you're wrong about me 100% percent of the time: priceless



...don't tell god your plans...

Marquis
(acolyte)
03/22/04 01:10 AM
Are you speaking? new [re: NoControl]  

Its amazing that you can write 5 posts in a row and fail to address anything in them. This, however, is priceless:

In reply to:

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.


Someone oughta have that as a signature, as it is an example of what the English language is capable of when wielded by a master.

Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


poorsoul
(acolyte)
03/22/04 03:08 AM
Lend new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

~ the cost of me ROTFLMFAO at the fact you're wrong about me 100% percent of the time: priceless



The content of your post: worthless.

I was simply trying to point out the contradictory nature of your defence so not only do you go on the attack but, yet again, reaffirm the point that you're not interested in what other people have to say if it isn't what you want to hear.

By the way...

In reply to:

~ the cost of you needing to get a blowjob: 30 cents



Does that even make sense?

Question Marks



EJSundayModerator
(acolyte)
03/22/04 04:28 AM
Having Been There new [re: Adam]  

In reply to:

I ask you to state the album that literally shocked Zappa's audience


Belonging to the tail end of the generation that hailed Zappa as one of the greatest musicians ever I can assure you that there was only one phase when his fans were shocked by him. Or at least puzzled. And that was in the late 70s when he put out his "Sheik Yerbouti" and "Joe's Garage (1-3)" albums. But the controversial factor wasn't that he had gone even more experimental - it was the fact that Old Frank had suddenly come up with albums that were at least partly pleasurable and digestable for, well, normal people.

It was a turn towards wider audiences (though he certainly remained Zappa-ish) that caused turmoil among the Zappa community. But in the end I think most of his fans made peace with those albums and see them as what they really are: Landmark Zappa products - like em or not. Zappa's "Let's Dance".

And I want to believe
In the madness that calls 'now'


Shyster
(crash course raver)
03/22/04 05:34 AM
> new [re: NoControl]  

Is being a cunt your sole purpose in life or is it just a hobby for the time being?

NEXT!

diamondogz74
(stardust savant)
03/22/04 06:47 AM
Re: Manic new [re: NoControl]  

Ok this might sound dumb to some of you.

But could some kind TW please explain what "ROTFLMRAO" actually means?

______________________
Humming Rheingold
We scavenge up our clothes

______________________
London Bye Ta-Ta...









Nature_Boy
(kook)
03/22/04 07:14 AM
Re: Manic new [re: diamondogz74]  

It means Roll On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off, or some such. Another hideous texting abreviation along the lines of lol, pmpl etc.

Its about time I had a signature

EJSundayModerator
(acolyte)
03/22/04 08:06 AM
A Lingering Lapse Of Agression new [re: xray_yak]  

In reply to:

Waters is the idiot that ousted Richard Wright.


Such a shame that twister isn't around these days. At least not in old form. You'd be in for some nice treatment and I for an entertaining read .

And I want to believe
In the madness that calls 'now'


RabbitFighter
(acolyte)
03/22/04 10:05 AM
Always crashing in the same car new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

Where should I hide then?


Just stay away from cars...

I'm the face of love
And this love burns cold



SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
03/22/04 02:05 PM
And the finnish alphabet has 29 letters. new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

"Speaking of twisting words: Marquis never contradicted that, did he? In fact, he spoke solely of your arguing habits, and of what can really be considered 'experimental'. No mention of Bowie in the entire post."

Of course he did and of course I mentioned Bowie. Trying reading once in awhile - it helps. There's 26 letters in the alphabet too...


You should have your eyes checked.

KArt | Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/22/04 11:24 PM
Re: Having Been There new [re: EJSunday]  

"Belonging to the tail end of the generation that hailed Zappa as one of the greatest musicians ever I can assure you that there was only one phase when his fans were shocked by him. Or at least puzzled. And that was in the late 70s when he put out his "Sheik Yerbouti" and "Joe's Garage (1-3)" albums. But the controversial factor wasn't that he had gone even more experimental - it was the fact that Old Frank had suddenly come up with albums that were at least partly pleasurable and digestable for, well, normal people.

It was a turn towards wider audiences (though he certainly remained Zappa-ish) that caused turmoil among the Zappa community. But in the end I think most of his fans made peace with those albums and see them as what they really are: Landmark Zappa products - like em or not. Zappa's "Let's Dance".


You know, if you were even more full of shit than with the info you provide and with the way you sound, I'd have to dig my way out of your dung with a shovel.

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/22/04 11:25 PM
Re: > new [re: Shyster]  

"Is being a cunt your sole purpose in life or is it just a hobby for the time being?"

No. Being in cunts is a sole purpose in life. Not being one.


A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/22/04 11:27 PM
Re: And the finnish alphabet has 29 letters. new [re: Sysiyo]  

I'm not the one wearing glasses.

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/22/04 11:34 PM
Re: Lend new [re: poorsoul]  

I attacked? I'm never the one to initially post inane drivel dripping with over-analytical BS that some of you seem to love to post after I make a very good point about the topic at hand.

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

poorsoul
(acolyte)
03/22/04 11:39 PM
Shelter new [re: NoControl]  

What I don't understand is why you make such a pretence of acting stupid.

Question Marks



NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/22/04 11:40 PM
Re: Are you speaking? new [re: Marquis]  

Ok, so let's recap!

You're:

~ judgemental
~ a hypocrite
~ an assclown
~ showing no signs of intelligence
~ an over-analytical deranged pseudo-psychologist who thinks he can tell things about someone even when only speaking to them a couple of times

Am I missing anything?

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Edited by NoControl on 03/23/04 00:43 AM (server time).



NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/22/04 11:43 PM
Re: Shelter new [re: poorsoul]  

What I don't understand is why are you stupid?

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

poorsoul
(acolyte)
03/23/04 00:10 AM
Blessing new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

Am I missing anything?



Signs of intelligence.

Question Marks



NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/23/04 00:41 AM
Re: Blessing new [re: poorsoul]  

Thanks! I'll add that to the list!

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Marquis
(acolyte)
03/23/04 03:04 AM
I am a robot, do what I say. new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

What I don't understand is why are you stupid?


Wow, I like the ring of the old one, but this one makes sense out of context. Please change your signature to this, actually. Or maybe we oughta have a vote? You can take whichever one doesn't win the popular vote, so that way you can still be contradictory.

I'd like to reiterate, though, please:
-keep your mouth foaming into one post at a time. Five of your biting witticisms in a row is a little tough to stomach.
-Speaking of which, you really ought to refrain from humor from the time being. You've got enough of a burden being right all the time without worrying about trying to get my goat as well.
-eat a bag of dicks

And come on, assclown? That is so 2002.

Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/23/04 03:41 AM
Re: I am a robot, do what I say. new [re: Marquis]  

"Wow, I like the ring of the old one, but this one makes sense out of context."

Okkkkkkkkk.

" Please change your signature to this, actually. Or maybe we oughta have a vote? You can take whichever one doesn't win the popular vote, so that way you can still be contradictory. "

I love when hypocrites like yourself talk. You provide humour while continuing to make yourself look as assoholic as ever.

"I'd like to reiterate, though, please:
-keep your mouth foaming into one post at a time. Five of your biting witticisms in a row is a little tough to stomach."


But what about six though?

"-Speaking of which, you really ought to refrain from humor from the time being. You've got enough of a burden being right all the time without worrying about trying to get my goat as well."

You own a goat? Can I meet him? Or is it a her? I must know!!!!!!!!!

"-eat a bag of dicks"

Eating a bag of kicks is conducive to my tastes.

"And come on, assclown? That is so 2002"

Really? I didn't hear it until 2003!

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Edited by NoControl on 03/23/04 03:42 AM (server time).



diamondogz74
(stardust savant)
03/23/04 06:28 AM
Re: Manic new [re: Nature_Boy]  

Thank you for that.

In which case i shall refrain from using it.

I can understand abbreviations on mobiles ( space and cost ),But on a board like this, I consider it stupid.

______________________
Humming Rheingold
We scavenge up our clothes

______________________
London Bye Ta-Ta...









Marquis
(acolyte)
03/23/04 11:45 AM
Baby you just keep me coming back new [re: NoControl]  

Wow, you're priceless. If you ever left NVQ, you could be the next TJ. I mean that. You should be proud.

I'm worried, though, by your lack of profile. I'd feel a little bad if you turned out to be as much of a child as you seem like; then again, I'd probably feel a lot worse that there was someone over the age of 17 who would actually behave like you.

And I guess I should put a note here about how not every 17 and under person here is an idiot, and not every older poster is great. You all know that.

Seriously, though, hypocrisy? Do you even know what that means? Where have I ever told you 'I'm right, you're wrong. Period'? Please, find it.

Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


White Prism
(electric tomato)
03/23/04 04:26 PM
What with our Culture and our charm and our brains new [re: White Prism]  

I’ve long held the belief that the ‘true’ experts in these matters are the musically-illiterate hoi polloi; the ones who are able to grope with a few technical terms such as ‘Fab Four’ and ‘great!!’ which they then attempt to cohere into the foundation for a solid argument. As I’m sure you’d guess, a rich source for such people is the undergraduate literati; particularly those who consider themselves too cutting-edge to give oral group-presentations on novels or subjects in which they have an ounce of knowledge, so tackle LPs they found in their dad’s attic instead. Well, what better way to gauge the Small Faces’ cultural impact than to get a couple of smashed students to draw up some random facts at 4 am the night before their talk?

Actually, the band they wanted to sell to the world was The Beatles. I admire originality, but fair enough. Up for discussion: What was their social impact on youth & drug culture? Pretty big, yep. Why is Sgt Peppers continually tipped as the greatest album ever made by critics and fans alike? Uh-oh. . . NME reader? How did they maintain their popularity while remaining the most experimental 60s band? Hmmm. . .

Among some of the other honours bestowed upon them were:
-first band ever to write their own music!
-first band ever to use backward tape loops!
-they were experimenting a full 30 years before Radiohead!

‘Fuck you!’ I muttered. Actually, I didn’t; I bit my tongue. But they placed undue emphasis on ‘Revolution #9’, considering how unrepresentative it is of their canon, and disparaged their own argument a little by saying that no-one ever listened to it.

- APPLAUSE -

Question One comes from someone who believes that the Beach Boys (esp. Smile) and the Small Faces (c.f. my first post ) were more experimental than the Beatles. What makes ‘Revolution #9’ so good? Nice question. --Actually, for your information, no one had attempted anything like ‘Revolution #9’ prior to the Beatles. Brian Wilson was struggling desperately to keep up with the Beatles all through the 60s and this was why he finally had a nervous breakdown. Nice put down. Even though I know jack about Brian Wilson, I imagine it was a little more complicated than that. No matter. . .

I mention something about ‘Interstellar Overdrive’ and ‘The Return Of The Son Of Monster Magnet!’ I couldn’t remember whether they used tape loops or not (the tape loop argument is becoming rather tedious by now), but the unexpected positioning of those tracks on a pop record surely made them the Beatles’ equal?

Suddenly, there’s a confusion over release dates and I’m tricked into thinking that Sgt Peppers is The White Album. Wait! Let me see. . . 1966, 1967, 1968. . .

And as it turns out, they’d barely heard of Zappa’s name. (Sorry, NoControl.. )

- Moving on!

Next question is about whether the Beatles would have made it big if Epstein hadn’t discovered them. (Not relevant to this discussion here, but the answer was ‘yes’, of course).

Time for one final question: (from dizzy, unshaven nonce on the front row) Would you say that Sgt Peppers is more experimental than Exile on Main Street? Now, I like Exile very much, but as experimental albums go. . .

- APPLAUSE -

So Marquis is correct: According to Manchester’s two esteemed Beatle-nerds, ‘The White Album’ is the most popular experimental record ever!

As John, Paul, George and Ringo leave the hot seat, we’re informed that the next group are giving presentations on American Beauty and whether it deconstructs the American Dream. . . Ah. Needless to say, I pay no attention, and I'm left fondling a handout which has Paul McCartney's grinning mug gleaming from it, with far greater concerns over resolving the tape loop argument which looping in my head. . .

‘Deboraarobed!’
Fuck.

Weave a circle round him thrice,
And close your eyes with holy dread


NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/24/04 01:31 AM
Re: Baby you just keep me coming back new [re: Marquis]  

"Wow, you're priceless. If you ever left NVQ, you could be the next TJ. I mean that. You should be proud."

Wow! You're a moron!

"I'm worried, though, by your lack of profile. I'd feel a little bad if you turned out to be as much of a child as you seem like; then again, I'd probably feel a lot worse that there was someone over the age of 17 who would actually behave like you."

You're talking to me about demeanor? Good christ! A walking contradiction indeed!

"And I guess I should put a note here about how not every 17 and under person here is an idiot, and not every older poster is great. You all know that. "

Does that even make sense?

"Seriously, though, hypocrisy? Do you even know what that means? Where have I ever told you 'I'm right, you're wrong. Period'? Please, find it."

You're taking your own hypocrisy out of context. Your above quotes are not how or why I called you that. You must be blind.

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Marquis
(acolyte)
03/24/04 11:15 AM
Ask Dr. Stupid new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

Your above quotes are not how or why I called you (a hypocrite)


Ok, then, why did you? As far as I can tell, this was the chronology:
-You accuse me of being unable to evaluate Bowie's career in an unbiased way, i.e. 'Lord God Bowie'
-I (not so)kindly point out to you that this has never happened, and invite you to prove me wrong, and further to this, invite you to actually do some research/paying attention before you start telling me what I said.
-Somehow, this turns into a slew of post about hypocrisy
-At this juncture, I wonder whether you know what the word means.

Alright, enough. Adam, I'm sorry to reduce a worthy thread topic into bickering, but hey, I haven't had a good one in awhile, and even if NoControl doesn't take anything from it, well at least I had a few chuckles.

Where's my little trouble girl?
There's no real trouble girl
Where's my little trouble girl?
C'mon c'mon c'mon


Cassiel
(wild eyed peoploid)
03/24/04 02:47 PM
Re: Baby you just keep me coming back new [re: NoControl]  

Who quotes themselves in their own signature? Seriously. Who would do that?

Read more books!

NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/24/04 06:08 PM
Re: Broken Hearts Are For Assholes new [re: Marquis]  

Fuck, you're stupid if you don't know why I called you a hypocrite. Remember, the lame-ass lecture about demeanor and talking to wildlifers as if they were third graders and then you turning around and talking to me like that, as if you weren't doing what you had just described of me? And I'm not going to go back and show you. Grow a brain.

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Edited by NoControl on 03/24/04 06:16 PM (server time).



NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/24/04 06:08 PM
Re: Baby you just keep me coming back new [re: Cassiel]  

Seriously. I would.

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

EJSundayModerator
(acolyte)
03/25/04 05:09 AM
Code Change new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

the lame-ass lecture about demeanor and talking to wildlifers as if they were third graders and then you turning around and talking to me like that


A desperate try to make you understand, possibly.

And I want to believe
In the madness that calls 'now'


NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/25/04 07:05 AM
Re: The Intensive Care Contingent new [re: EJSunday]  

It's interesting that you take my quote out of context to prove some kind of point that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If you noticed, I wasn't agreeing that I was initially talking to people like that. But of course you're too far beyond sensitive to figure that out (or want to)...

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

EJSundayModerator
(acolyte)
03/25/04 07:30 AM
There can Be Only One new [re: NoControl]  

Hi NoControl old friend. How are you doing these days. I see you have been busy posting here a lot. Fine. It is always a great pleasure to read your posts - the more the better. There is just one little thing I would like to, well, not really complain, but, ahem - it is just because you are so tremendously good at statistics and language that I think there is one thing I would like you to do: Could you figure out the number of posts that the average TWer needs, to get his message across without starting to repeat himself over and over again?

I know you can do it and I wouldn't dare ask anybody else here to have a go at such a difficult task.

Thanks a lot. Can't wait for your answers.

Yours Truly
EJSunday

And I want to believe
In the madness that calls 'now'


NoControl
(electric tomato)
03/25/04 07:41 AM
Re: A+ new [re: EJSunday]  

I don't give a shit about my post counts. But if someone asks me a question, I'll answer them. It's curteous, it's cordial and it's what I'll most likely do. And with this thread at least, with the amount of things people like to say, I'm glad to respond.

Anyways, I like you post. An A+ for effort!

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
03/25/04 07:59 AM
Re: A+ new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

-- I'll answer them. It's curteous, it's cordial --




KArt | Project Michelangelo | LiveJournal

JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
04/07/04 11:20 PM
What a fucking twat... new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

You need to check out Frank Zappa's entire catalogue and get back to me in a couple of years. Then you'll know what innovation is all about.


Your idea of innovation is switching to the left hand to wank when looking at whatever indecent child website you're looking at on any given day.

Here's your challenge: Provide succint aesthetic reasons for Zappa being better than Bowie, or more experimental. Relate in terms of tonailty, structural change, chord progression, sound texturing, production techniques etc. Then relate the music to it's social and cultural roots and influences. Examine the long term effects of the music on popular and musical culture. Then, if you can provide some kind of half coherent argument to sustain even one of your mind-numbingly ignorant assertions, you can have a lollipop. See, anyone can have an opinion, but an objectionable cunt like you who thinks he has found some kind of aesthetic objective truth simply needs to get a little humble. Or kill themself.

Otherwise just go home to mother, I'm sure she's getting lonely and needs tucking in...

He's the son of a bad man...

NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/08/04 01:03 AM
Re: This is TOO Easy... new [re: JonnyManic]  

"Your idea of innovation is switching to the left hand to wank when looking at whatever indecent child website you're looking at on any given day."

Ahh, another jerk-off who doesn't know what they're talking about and talking out of his asscrack!

"Here's your challenge: Provide succint aesthetic reasons for Zappa being better than Bowie"

Better is subjective and hence irrelevant.


", or more experimental. Relate in terms of tonailty, structural change, chord progression, sound texturing, production techniques etc. Then relate the music to it's social and cultural roots and influences. Examine the long term effects of the music on popular and musical culture. Then, if you can provide some kind of half coherent argument to sustain even one of your mind-numbingly ignorant assertions, you can have a lollipop. See, anyone can have an opinion, but an objectionable cunt like you who thinks he has found some kind of aesthetic objective truth simply needs to get a little humble. Or kill themself."

Ok then...

Frank's revolutionary innovations & experimentations included every conceivable style of music possible, including fusions of: jazz, big band, r&b, soul, avant-garde, country & classical.

His creations and supporting technologies in their inceptions and earliest of stages, included:

~ xenochrony: process whereby mixing live & studio parts together to create instant compositions
~ rock theatre: long before Alice Cooper & David Bowie were bringing theatrics into rock music, as early as '67, Frank was doing things as crazy as inviting fans onstage in what he called "audience participation" - sometimes performing the show while The Mothers & him sat in the audience!
~ guitar textures and effects: Frank hadn't even heard of Hendrix when he started using the wah-wah pedal, let alone manipulating his guitars into "mutants"
~ digital technology: was the first patron of such the second it was invented in 1980
~ compact discs: the very first artist to release CDs in the early eighties
etc...

Do you want more or do you need a napkin to wipe the egg off of your face?

"Otherwise just go home to mother, I'm sure she's getting lonely and needs tucking in..."

Is someone who likes to worship Bowie on a daily basis shitting his pants because his "rock god" is being criticized?

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Marquis
(acolyte)
04/08/04 11:18 AM
Yeah, well Bowie invented the fax machine! new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

His creations and supporting technologies in their inceptions and earliest of stages, included . . . compact discs: the very first artist to release CDs in the early eighties


I don't know which is funnier, the language mangling going on in the first line, or that you're giving Zappa credit for compact disc technology. Amazing, truly.

Also, can you provide some detail as to why inviting people on stage was so groundbreaking or 'crazy'? Or at least some evidence that this never happened prior to 1967?


All the things I said I didn't know and didn't want to know
That you told me just to tell me later that you told me so
Come flooding back to me now


Cassiel
(wild eyed peoploid)
04/08/04 12:11 PM
Re: Yeah, well Bowie invented the fax machine! new [re: Marquis]  

In reply to:

you're giving Zappa credit for compact disc technology.


To give the loon his due; (no matter how much it pains me) I don't think he's actually suggesting that Zappa invented the CD, rather that he was one of the first artists to release music on the new format.

I don't think this is actually true (according to my information the first ever commercial CD release was "52nd Street" by Billy Joel in Japan on the 10th January 1982 and the first US release was either Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA" or the "Edison CD Sampler" both March 1983) but then NoControl's not a man to let a little accuracy get in the way of his pursuit of the "Most spittle sprayed over a PC Screen in a single afternoon" World Record!

Read more books!

pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
04/08/04 12:32 PM
Re: Yeah, well Bowie invented the fax machine! new [re: Cassiel]  

What I want to know is, who woke him up again!!!



I believe in the Power of Good
I Believe in the State of Love
I Will Fight For the Right to be Right
I Will Kill for the Good of the Fight for the Right to be Right


Cassiel
(wild eyed peoploid)
04/08/04 12:39 PM
What I want to know is, who woke him up again!!! new [re: pablopicasso]  

I imagine it would have been one of those Godzilla/Quatermass and the Pit scenarios; man exploring rashly where he's "just not meant to go" wakens something evil and disgusting from the depths! Underwater nuclear testing would be my guess.

Read more books!

pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
04/08/04 12:44 PM
Re: What I want to know is, who woke him up again!!! new [re: Cassiel]  

Damn them, did they not see the signs, did they not think what they were doing?
Now all of humanity will be lost because of man's foollishness.

I believe in the Power of Good
I Believe in the State of Love
I Will Fight For the Right to be Right
I Will Kill for the Good of the Fight for the Right to be Right


Marquis
(acolyte)
04/08/04 12:49 PM
Always On the Ball new [re: pablopicasso]  

From the Onion's News in Brief:

Frank Zappa Fan Thinks You Just Haven't Heard The Right Album
NEDERLAND, CO—In spite of your insistence that you are not into Frank Zappa, avid fan Roger Von Lee believes that you would change your mind if you heard the right album. "You're prejudiced, because the only Zappa you know is 'Valley Girl' and 'Don't Eat The Yellow Snow,'" Von Lee told you Tuesday. "Seriously, you need to check out Hot Rats or Absolutely Free. Zappa and the Mothers were at their peak, and Zappa's jazz-rock fusion experiments predate Bitches Brew. That'll totally convince you that Zappa's the shit." Von Lee added that if those two don't get under your skin, he can recommend another 15 to 20 albums that will for sure.



All the things I said I didn't know and didn't want to know
That you told me just to tell me later that you told me so
Come flooding back to me now


SysiyoModerator
(thunder ocean)
04/08/04 01:01 PM
OMD! new [re: Marquis]  



KArt // Project Michelangelo // LiveJournal

JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
04/08/04 04:11 PM
sterilise this man and his family. fast new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

Better is subjective and hence irrelevant


Pretty much the entire point of my post, lame-brain.

In reply to:

Frank's revolutionary innovations & experimentations included every conceivable style of music possible


You clearly have no understanding of musical theory claim that Zappa experimented in every style possible. How about dodecaphony? Minimalism?

In reply to:

xenochrony: process whereby mixing live & studio parts together to create instant compositions


Two points:
1) That's not what really Xenochrony is. Xenochrony is when you combine seperately recorded musicians who have no common reference point to create a piece, regardless of the context of the recording.
2) Zappa coined the phrase but he certainly didn't invent it. It's generally accepted that Charles Ives was the first composer to employ xenochrony back in the first two decades of the 20th century.

In reply to:

rock theatre


This is too stupid an assertion to pay much credit to. I'd simply point you in the direction of the likes of Little Richard and Jerry Lee Lewis.

In reply to:

guitar technique


True, Zappa did much to develop guitar textures, though others were certainly ahead of him in the importance and quality of their developments in my opinion (as a guitarist).

In reply to:

digital technology/compact discs


zzz. I note your inability to comment on Zappa's playing and compositional style in any concrete terms.

The point I was trying to make (other than the fact that you're an imbecilic waste of natural resources) is that your attempt to offer any aesthetic judgement as a matter of fact, supported by nothing other than your typically retarded bluster is typical of someone who has no idea what they are talking about.

I personally agree that from a technical point of view, Zappa is clearly a more innovative musician than Bowie. Mind you, he pales compared to John MacLaughlin or Hendrix. But this is all just opinion. Problem is, you're such a fucking plum that you think your opinion on music is somehow better than the others here who, when they offer they're own opinion, you try to slate them with mentally-deficient ad hominem insults about how they don't like to see their rock god attacked. Never mind the fact that TW as a whole is usually very critical of Bowie's output when they think it's below par. But why let reality get in the way of the fact that you're utterly incapable of formulating an argument or an insult because 90% of your brain cells have been replaced with backed-up sperm from sucking your dad's cock too much.

Now, how do you like them apples?

He's the son of a bad man...

NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/08/04 09:15 PM
Re: sterilise this man and his family. fast new [re: JonnyManic]  

"Pretty much the entire point of my post, lame-brain."

Well, if you could read properly, you'd notice from the beginning of this thread that I wasn't saying that Frank was better, even though it's my opinion he is. I was answering Adam's question, moron.

"You clearly have no understanding of musical theory claim that Zappa experimented in every style possible. How about dodecaphony? Minimalism?"

You clearly are speaking out of your ass once again.

Even though Frank didn't like Minimalism, he utilized it in a somewhat vague way when performing his "air sculptures". He juxstaposed simple chord progressions with complex solos. Listen to Shut Up & Play 'Yer Guitar, Guitar & Trance-Fusion for example.

As far as Dodecaphony is concerned, he's variated that as well is similar ways.

"Two points:
1) That's not what really Xenochrony is. Xenochrony is when you combine seperately recorded musicians who have no common reference point to create a piece, regardless of the context of the recording."


I know that. There's many variations to it. You're just expounding on what I'm saying.


"2) Zappa coined the phrase but he certainly didn't invent it. It's generally accepted that Charles Ives was the first composer to employ xenochrony back in the first two decades of the 20th century."

I didn't say he did.

"This is too stupid an assertion to pay much credit to. I'd simply point you in the direction of the likes of Little Richard and Jerry Lee Lewis."

Oh so, Jerry Lee Lewis and Little Richard invited people on the stage and gave them their instruments to perform a concert's worth of material while they watched from the audience?


"True, Zappa did much to develop guitar textures, though others were certainly ahead of him in the importance and quality of their developments in my opinion (as a guitarist)."

Not even close.


"zzz. I note your inability to comment on Zappa's playing and compositional style in any concrete terms."

I said you did you want more? I guess that's a yes? So, let's get on with it...

Apart from the synclavier (which he was the very first patron of), the guitar was Zappa's favourite instrument and he utilized his "chicken and spider" approach to form his unique ability to play. From the way he held his pick - by pluck the strings and not picking them to create a punching like effect, to the way he invented solos on the spot during live shows (sometimes for 10 minutes straight!), instead of playing the same solo repeatedly night after night. They are in themselves, many of his Zappaisms.

Xylophones were a major melodic component to his art too - as the flourishes were Zappaesque and instantly recognizable.

He also found ways to incorporate orchestra/classical music in his music. He was one of the first (if not the first) to record with an symphonic orchestra on Lumpy Gravy (1967), but more so in dissonant atmospheres with dense clusters.

Zappa was the first rock musician to bring obscene/profane lyrics into popular music in the mid-sixties. He was talking about things people weren't even dreaming about.

Zappa recorded the very first rock double album with Freak Out! in 1965.

Want more? Or do you need another napkin?


"The point I was trying to make (other than the fact that you're an imbecilic waste of natural resources) is that your attempt to offer any aesthetic judgement as a matter of fact, supported by nothing other than your typically retarded bluster is typical of someone who has no idea what they are talking about."

You really need to stop talking now. It's more than likely quite embarrassing for you at this point...

"I personally agree that from a technical point of view, Zappa is clearly a more innovative musician than Bowie.

The only intelligent thing you've said thus far.

" Problem is, you're such a fucking plum that you think your opinion on music is somehow better than the others here who, when they offer they're own opinion, you try to slate them with mentally-deficient ad hominem insults about how they don't like to see their rock god attacked. Never mind the fact that TW as a whole is usually very critical of Bowie's output when they think it's below par. But why let reality get in the way of the fact that you're utterly incapable of formulating an argument or an insult because 90% of your brain cells have been replaced with backed-up sperm from sucking your dad's cock too much."

Your problem is that you assume too much. You have much in common with many of the members of this site. Insults are your only way of somehow reassuring yourself that you're right, when in fact you have no logical rebutal at all.

"Now, how do you like them apples?"

I like slurpees myself.



A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Edited by NoControl on 04/08/04 09:17 PM (server time).



JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
04/08/04 09:56 PM
it's like talking to Robbie The Robot on crack new [re: NoControl]  

Ok, this post is your opinions strung out again and not even convincingly. So I'll cut through the remarkably idiotic chaff (Particularly your utterly ignorant idea about dodecaphony which you clearly have no concept of).

In reply to:

Want more? Or do you need another napkin?


Your just making a list of a few things Zappa did! You're not proving a greater level of innovation since innovation is not quantifiable, one man's innovation is another's irrelevancy. You're certainly not providing any argument to show that Zappa produced a more conceptually experimental album than Low that was as popular as Low. I would actually argue that Low's diversity of texture, musical style, use overt use oif minimalist techniques makes it a far more groundbreaking piece of popular music. Zappa's music followed an organic trend. Bowie's Low was a complete departure from previous work and was not in any way typical of a pop record. "Warszawa" and "Subterreneans" would never have been expected on a pop album, but certainly not alongside the honky-tonk squall of "Be My Wife" or the driving, percussive "What In The World". Zappa's popular music, despite his experimentation within it, largely followed established rock/jazz trends. His more experimental work, like his collected improvisations etc. is not in any way popular or widely distributed. This is the arguement. You don't have a logical arguement, you have an arbitrary list that you've pulled out of a book or website. There is no discourse, you''re simply regurgitating facts as if they are empirical evidence.

In reply to:

Insults are your only way of somehow reassuring yourself that you're right, when in fact you have no logical rebutal at all.


No, insults are fun to throw at you because your such an obvious, insecure target. You need to trumpet your opinion as though it's fact like a shield. You're absurd obsession with album sales and statistics simply indicates you will die a virgin. I've provided nothing but logical arguement. You're throwing up a load of statistics because you are incapable of formulating any coherant arguement to back up your assertions.

Besides, we all know who's won the arguement. Hell, I could have posted a shopping list and I'd win the arguement because everyone thinks you're a sad prick. But I win the arguement because I have one. You just have vitriol and a music biography.

He's the son of a bad man...

NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/08/04 10:31 PM
Re: it's like talking to Robbie The Robot on crack new [re: JonnyManic]  

"Your just making a list of a few things Zappa did! You're not proving a greater level of innovation since innovation is not quantifiable, one man's innovation is another's irrelevancy. You're certainly not providing any argument to show that Zappa produced a more conceptually experimental album than Low that was as popular as Low. I would actually argue that Low's diversity of texture, musical style, use overt use oif minimalist techniques makes it a far more groundbreaking piece of popular music. Zappa's music followed an organic trend. Bowie's Low was a complete departure from previous work and was not in any way typical of a pop record. "Warszawa" and "Subterreneans" would never have been expected on a pop album, but certainly not alongside the honky-tonk squall of "Be My Wife" or the driving, percussive "What In The World". Zappa's popular music, despite his experimentation within it, largely followed established rock/jazz trends. His more experimental work, like his collected improvisations etc. is not in any way popular or widely distributed. This is the arguement. You don't have a logical arguement, you have an arbitrary list that you've pulled out of a book or website. There is no discourse, you''re simply regurgitating facts as if they are empirical evidence."

Fuck, are you a joker or something? Regurgitating facts? Websites? No discourse or proof? ROTFLMFAO. All I've done in this thread is prove that Frank is the most experimental/innovative artist of the 20 century, if not ever. Invest in some reading lessons, if you're serious about this crap you spew. You obviously know nothing about his music whatsoever. Frank wasn't a follower, he was pioneer, a genious and a leader. And if Frank wasn't that popular, then why did he continually perform in or sell out 10-15,000 seat arenas (or the equivalent of) the world over, in: Detroit, New York City, Washington, DC, Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Toronto, Chicago, Montreal, London, Rotterdam, Paris, Sydney, Melbourne, Rome, etc., on every one of his concert tours since 1973? He was even equalling Bowie's concert drawing power in Europe from 1977-1982. Stick to your BS Coffee Shop topics or something...

But I gotta admit, at least you're funny as hell. Seriously.


"No, insults are fun to throw at you because your such an obvious, insecure target. You need to trumpet your opinion as though it's fact like a shield. You're absurd obsession with album sales and statistics simply indicates you will die a virgin. I've provided nothing but logical arguement. You're throwing up a load of statistics because you are incapable of formulating any coherant arguement to back up your assertions.

Die a virgin, huh? I get more tail then you could ever imagine. But that's beside the point.

The only way to describe you is that you're a complete and total idiot!

"Besides, we all know who's won the arguement. Hell, I could have posted a shopping list and I'd win the arguement because everyone thinks you're a sad prick. But I win the arguement because I have one. You just have vitriol and a music biography."

You haven't won anything but your own jerk-off ceremony and pissing contest.




A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

CAwesome
(kook)
04/08/04 10:42 PM
Re: it's like talking to Robbie The Robot on crack new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

And if Frank wasn't that popular, then why did he continually perform in or sell out 10-15,000 seat arenas (or the equivalent of) the world over, in: Detroit, New York City, Washington, DC, Philadelphia, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Toronto, Chicago, Montreal, London, Rotterdam, Paris, Sydney, Melbourne, Rome, etc., on every one of his concert tours since 1973? He was even equalling Bowie's concert drawing power in Europe from 1977-1982.


In reply to:

Regurgitating facts?


Yes you are.

I'll be appearing LIVE in London May 14th. Sure, it's a David Bowie show but you're all coming to see me. More importantly, you're coming to see me in my awesome new pants.

RabbitFighter
(acolyte)
04/08/04 10:57 PM
Re: it's like talking to Robbie The Robot on crack new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

You're absurd obsession with album sales and statistics simply indicates you will die a virgin


For the love of god (or some other insignificant twat) Johnny, don't go there! Pretty soon NoControl (also known as the pitiful bastard who needs to be put down like a dog) will try to suck you into a furious dickmeasuring contest and we all know just how ugly that can get.

"yes, I think I will experience a light depression around 9:00 Wednesday which will worsen until 13:00, after which I will probably experience an elevation of mood"
StrangeDivine

NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/08/04 11:05 PM
Re: it's like talking to Robbie The Robot on crack new [re: CAwesome]  

You're missing the point. He was implying that regurgitating facts is somehow what is not needed to prove points. Well, guess what? It is!

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

AdamAdministrator
(acolyte)
04/09/04 07:03 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: bowiefanpeter]  

In reply to:

I can only keep on thinking one thing during this entire thread.
Why is the LOW album never mentioned outside the Bowie legend?
People here call it the greatest album of the 20th century. Looking at it closer, outside David articles, and being namechecked a couple time by Trent, I don't think I have ever seen it once mentioned as being an independantly strong piece of music. It's not even considered amongst Eno's creme de la creme of albums he's worked on.

Maybe people still have to come around to the album, or they never think Bowie could be a serious composer.

I, personally, love this album. Just what am I missing?


Peter, I think you'll find that Low has become very respected outside of the Bowie legend. It is not yet at the status of Pet Sounds or Revolver but I believe that it is generally on the rise.

According to the latest placings on the Acclaimed Music List, Low is now placed as the 89th greatest album ever made. I have drawn reference to this list in the past and I know it is not the be all and end all but it does try to compile as many critical listings as possible. In fact, here are the accolades for Low (which incidentally fairs better than any album Zappa ever released):

* New Musical Express (UK) - Albums of the Year 27

* Sounds (UK) - Albums of the Year 15

* Dave Marsh & Kevin Stein (USA) - The 40 Best of Album Chartmakers by Year (1981) 7

* Schlager (Sweden) - The 30 Best Albums of All Time (1984) 22

* New Musical Express (UK) - All Times Top 100 Albums (1985) 15

* Sounds (UK) - The 100 Best Albums of All Time (1986) 35

* Pure Pop (Mexico) - The Best Albums of All Time (1993) 56

* New Musical Express (UK) - All Times Top 100 Albums + Top 50 by Decade (1993) 67

* Pop (Sweden) - The World's 100 Best Albums + 300 Complements (1994) 63

* BigO (Singapore) - The 100 Best Albums from 1975 to 1995 (1995) 24

* Alternative Melbourne (Australia) - The Top 100 Rock/Pop Albums (1996) 57

* Guardian (UK) - The 100 Best Albums Ever (1997) 62

* Q (UK) - The 50 Best Albums of the 70s (1998) 30

* Panorama (Norway) - The 30 Best Albums of the Year 1970-98 (1999) 3

* David Kleijwegt (Netherlands) - Top 100 Albums of All Time (1999) 23

* Spex (Germany) - The 100 Albums of the Century (1999) 29

* Showbizz (Brazil) - 100 CDs of All Time (1999) 2

* Q (UK) - The 100 Greatest British Albums Ever (2000) 14

* The Review, University of Delaware (USA) - 100 Greatest Albums of All Time (2001) 48

* Rolling Stone (USA) - The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time (2003) 249

* New Musical Express (UK) - Top 100 Albums of All Time (2003) 26

* Vox (UK) - 100 Records that Shook the World (1991) No Order

* New Musical Express (UK) - 40 Records That Captured the Moment 1952-91 (1992) No Order

* Rolling Stone (USA) - The Essential 200 Rock Records (1997) No Order

* Rock & Folk (France) - The Best Albums from 1963 to 1999 (1999) No Order

* Elvis Costello - 500 Albums You Need (2000) No Order

* Stuart Maconie's Critical List on BBC Radio 2 (UK) - One Album Added Each Week No Order

* Blender (USA) - 500 CDs You Must Own Before You Die (2003) No Order

* Mojo (UK) - The Mojo Collection, Third Edition (2003) No Order

* Robert Christgau (USA) - Consumer Guide Album Grade B+

* Rolling Stone Album Guide, Ratings 1-5 Stars (USA, 1992) 3.5 Stars

* MusicHound Rock and R&B (USA) - Album Ratings 0-5 Bones (1998-99) 4 Bones

* Paul Roland (UK) - CD Guide to Pop & Rock, Album Ratings 1-5 Stars (2001) 3 Stars

* All Music Guide (USA) - Album Ratings 1-5 Stars 5 Stars

* Martin C. Strong (UK) - The Great Rock Discography 6th Edition, Ratings 1-10 10

* Virgin Encyclopedia of Popular Music (UK) - Album Ratings 1-5 Stars (2002) 4 Stars

Incidentally, Bowie currently has no less than 5 albums in the top 200. No other artist in recorded music history has more than him and both Dylan and The Beatles are equal on 5. Of those albums: Ziggy Stardust comes in at #15 - one of the highest recent rankings I've ever seen for it - in fact if you look at all of the albums above it, they are the 'big guns' of rock n roll. Hunky Dory is at 54, Low at 89. Heroes at 185 and Station to Station at 198.


Bowie in Australia 2004 | Join the Community

pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
04/09/04 07:08 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Adam]  

Was there ANY Zappa in that list?

Ok Zappa is very innovative, but ask someone off the street to hum one of his songs?
I bet they could sing a bowie song.
Why are we comparing the two anyway, they are totally different and have hardly crossed over into the same spheres. I think most people would know Sound and vision is a bowie song, well those into music anyway, I wonder how many would know a song off Hot rats?


I await the wrath of No_Control.

I'll wish, and the thunder clouds will vanish
Wish, and the storm will fade away


Avatar Courtesy of Nature_boy


bowiefanpeter
(acolyte)
04/09/04 07:17 AM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: pablopicasso]  

Just curious, was Zappa ever fully signed to a record company?

I thought he just had a distribution deal where he paid for the albums and a big company got them across the country.

I find some of the other albums, listed earlier this thread, more likely contenders to the list because they had to get other people to agree to releasing them. Yes, Zappa was innovative, but to me it's just 70 albums of stuff I can't listen to. Yes, I have a small FZ collection.

BFP



JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
04/09/04 04:17 PM
stuck in a loop new [re: NoControl]  

I think everyone here has seen the point I'm making, the fact that you haven't is simply an example of how mentally simple you really are.

As for this ludicrous idea:

In reply to:

All I've done in this thread is prove that Frank is the most experimental/innovative artist of the 20 century, if not ever


I'd suggest that you never look to a career in law if you think you've proved anything and that, if you considewr that Zappa is the most experimental artist ever you consider investigating real experimental music by the likes of Karlheinz Stockhausen, Iannis Xenakis, Harry Partch, John Cage, all composers and performers whose experimentation in musical styles, tonality, trexture and performance outstrip any achievement of Zappa's on the level of expanding musical theory beyond traditional forms. Whether they are more or less innovative is, as I've said, a matter of opinion. Their contribution to the body of musical theory is not.

I'd suggest that you have no idea what you're talking about other than the fact that you like Zappa and are aware of the fact that he has a reputation as a pioneer. Therefore you bluster, you provide a few arbitrary lists but have no central thesis other than trying to be an annoying cunt. Well, you've well and truly suceeded on one level!

I'd also suggest that you have no friends.

He's the son of a bad man...

NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/09/04 06:25 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: pablopicasso]  

This isn't a popularity contest.

A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/09/04 06:33 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: bowiefanpeter]  

FZ was signed to many record labels and had a variety of distribution deals in his 30 year career. In fact, I can't think of that many major labels that he hadn't been signed to at one point or another. It's confusing keeping track...

Rykodisc released his back catalogue beginning in the mid-eighties and re-released it again in 1995 with a few bonus tracks.

Which Zappa recordings do you own, BPF?



A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
04/09/04 06:35 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: NoControl]  

Thank goodness for that then.

I'll wish, and the thunder clouds will vanish
Wish, and the storm will fade away


Avatar Courtesy of Nature_boy


NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/09/04 06:43 PM
Re: stuck in a loop new [re: JonnyManic]  

"I think everyone here has seen the point I'm making, the fact that you haven't is simply an example of how mentally simple you really are."

Did I say how funny you were?

"I'd suggest that you never look to a career in law if you think you've proved anything and that, if you considewr that Zappa is the most experimental artist ever you consider investigating real experimental music by the likes of Karlheinz Stockhausen, Iannis Xenakis, Harry Partch, John Cage, all composers and performers whose experimentation in musical styles, tonality, trexture and performance outstrip any achievement of Zappa's on the level of expanding musical theory beyond traditional forms. Whether they are more or less innovative is, as I've said, a matter of opinion. Their contribution to the body of musical theory is not."

You don't know what you're talking about. I suggest you listen to Zappa's music, since you've obviously haven't heard it, or probably only an album or two at the very least...

"I'd suggest that you have no idea what you're talking about other than the fact that you like Zappa and are aware of the fact that he has a reputation as a pioneer. Therefore you bluster, you provide a few arbitrary lists but have no central thesis other than trying to be an annoying cunt. Well, you've well and truly suceeded on one level!"

You have to understand that facts provide proof. But I know, for you facts are a baffling concept.

"I'd also suggest that you have no friends."


You suggest wrong, as usual.

Btw, here's another fact: did you know Zappa had the prototype 16 track recorder in 1969 that he used to record his materpiece, Hot Rats?


A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
04/09/04 06:53 PM
zzz new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

You don't know what you're talking about. I suggest you listen to Zappa's music


It's like saying, "hey, you should look into Picasso, Kandinsky, Gaugin, Matisse" and hearing in reply, "You don't know what you're talking about. I suggest you see more of Nature_Boy's bowie album covers"

No offence, Nature_Boy.

In reply to:

since you've obviously haven't heard it, or probably only an album or two at the very least...


Marquis! That Onion article come to life!!!

He's the son of a bad man...

pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
04/09/04 06:56 PM
Re: stuck in a loop [re: NoControl]  

And exactly what facts have you quoted?

I'll wish, and the thunder clouds will vanish
Wish, and the storm will fade away


Avatar Courtesy of Nature_boy


NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/09/04 07:16 PM
Re: zzz new [re: JonnyManic]  

"It's like saying, "hey, you should look into Picasso, Kandinsky, Gaugin, Matisse" and hearing in reply, "You don't know what you're talking about. I suggest you see more of Nature_Boy's bowie album covers"

No, it's not. I was responding to your assertion that those composers outstripped Zappa achievements. And that's not true in the least.

PP,

You must be blind.



A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
04/09/04 07:38 PM
bad doggy new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

I was responding to your assertion that those composers outstripped Zappa achievements. And that's not true in the least


You'd do better to simply admit you have no idea who they are or what the contribution to musical theory that they made was. Or you could pretend you do know and find some facts on them on a search engine! Go Spot, Go!

In reply to:

PP,

You must be blind.


I won't even bother here. I just suppose that when you put so much effort into being a philistine, being a twat comes naturally.

He's the son of a bad man...

NoControl
(electric tomato)
04/10/04 07:54 PM
Re: new [re: JonnyManic]  

"You'd do better to simply admit you have no idea who they are or what the contribution to musical theory that they made was. Or you could pretend you do know and find some facts on them on a search engine! Go Spot, Go!"

You'd do better to simply admit that Frank Zappa is the most innovative/experiemental artist of the 20th Century. And I wasn't saying that Ives, Cage, etc. didn't contribute to music. I know who they are but hte problem is that you're an assumption whore and hence you make me laugh my ass off consistently. What I'm saying is that the amount of innovations/progressions/experimentations/ etc., that Zappa indulged in and created or helped to create, far "outstrips" their accomplishments, that it's not even debatable.

"I won't even bother here. I just suppose that when you put so much effort into being a philistine, being a twat comes naturally."

It's nice of you to respond to someone else's posts for them.



A wrong assumption of myself on the part of you.

Marquis
(acolyte)
04/10/04 08:05 PM
Your Zappa Hard-on Knows No Bounds new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

it's not even debatable.


Well nothing with you is 'debatable' because all you do is stick your fingers in your ears and shout 'I'mrightI'mrightI'mright' over and over again.

Oh babe, I'm going nowhere
Nowhere's where I want to be
And babe, I'm good for nothing
Nothing is good enough for me


Grey_Nihilist
(electric tomato)
04/10/04 08:33 PM
Re: new [re: NoControl]  

Name me at least 20 artists that have been influenced by Zappa, then we'll talk.

I will eat - YOUR - SOUL!

ohramonaModerator
(stardust savant)
04/10/04 09:07 PM
Buttinsky new [re: Grey_Nihilist]  

Crazy Backwards Alphabet, Meat Puppets, Scatterbrain, They Might Be Giants, Alternative TV, Plastic People of the Universe, X-Legged Sally, Aquarium Rescue Unit, Bruce Hampton, George Clinton, Carl Grayson, Amy X Neuburg, Chris Opperman, Umphrey's McGee, Dino DiMuro, Flat Earth Society, Rick Bartow, Robbie 'Seahag' Mangano, Ossi Duri, Warren DeMartini, Mike Portnoy, Steve Vai, Fred, Tubes, Red Peters, Mike Gordon & Trey Anastasio (Phish), Guitar Guru, Prawns With Horns.



shitr

Marquis
(acolyte)
04/10/04 09:11 PM
Prawn of Satan new [re: ohramona]  

So creating the likes of Steve Vai and Phish is a good thing?

Oh babe, I'm going nowhere
Nowhere's where I want to be
And babe, I'm good for nothing
Nothing is good enough for me


ohramonaModerator
(stardust savant)
04/10/04 09:14 PM
Picky picky picky new [re: Marquis]  

Oh. Now you want 20 good artists!



shitr

CAwesome
(kook)
04/11/04 01:15 AM
Re: Picky picky picky new [re: ohramona]  

It's not that hard, let's just start off with what you had to begin with and see what's left...

George Clinton.

Uhh, well, George Clinton was in Parliament AND Funkadelic, so that counts as two, right?

I'll be appearing LIVE in London May 14th. Sure, it's a David Bowie show but you're all coming to see me. More importantly, you're coming to see me in my awesome new pants.

poorsoul
(acolyte)
04/11/04 02:37 AM
Elbox new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

This isn't a popularity contest.



Actually it is, since it's about the "Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20th Century".

Nothing Is New



bowiefanpeter
(acolyte)
04/11/04 04:28 AM
Re: Elbox new [re: poorsoul]  

During concerts, why has Bowie introduced songs from LOW as "he's one from an album 30 of you bought"?

BFP



Grey_Nihilist
(electric tomato)
04/11/04 11:54 AM
Re: Elbox new [re: poorsoul]  

In reply to:

This isn't a popularity contest.

------------------------------------------------------------------------


Actually it is, since it's about the "Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20th Century".


Just because it's experimental, doesn't mean it's any good (though I do like Low).



I will eat - YOUR - SOUL!

JonnyManic
(stardust savant)
04/11/04 04:49 PM
I bet you dribble when you smile... new [re: NoControl]  

In reply to:

It's nice of you to respond to someone else's posts for them.


Man, I thought you were ragging on the real Pablo Picasso. It's hard to keep up with your rabidly confused posts.

In reply to:

that it's not even debatable


...

OK, because you demanded it:

Eggs (half dozen, free range)
Wholemeal loaf
Milk (2 litres)
Tomatoes
Cucumber
Lettuce
Onion
Mushrooms (Button)
Vitamins
Toothpaste

He's the son of a bad man...

The_Omen
(wild eyed peoploid)
04/12/04 01:48 AM
Re: Guest new [re: poorsoul]  

Just thought i'd stay out of the obvious conflict and interject about NIN 'The Fragile'. It's at least as popular as LOW. It did debut at number 1 on the Billboard charts. Although I believe it promptly fell out the next week. But still, it's a masterpiece, and belongs up there, if not ahead of 'LOW', which I love by the way. But if we're going on terms of sales+experimentation, i'm fairly certain 'The Fragile' sold more than 'Low' did, especially considering Fragile is only 5 years old. However, you can't go wrong with either. Plus i'm almost positive some of the instrumentals on Fragile are direct descendants of Low. Okay, so I solved nothing, but...

I cannot live, I cannot die

poorsoul
(acolyte)
04/12/04 03:22 AM
Weep new [re: The_Omen]  

Nothing on this thread solves anything. If we can't even resolve what constitutes "popular" and "experimental", then there's really nowhere for the debate to go.

Nothing Is New



pablopicasso
(electric tomato)
04/12/04 05:40 AM
Re: Weep new [re: poorsoul]  

In reply to:

Nothing on this thread solves anything. If we can't even resolve what constitutes "popular" and "experimental", then there's really nowhere for the debate to go.


As is the case whenever No_control gets involved with a debate.

I'll wish, and the thunder clouds will vanish
Wish, and the storm will fade away


Avatar Courtesy of Nature_boy


poorsoul
(acolyte)
04/13/04 02:49 AM
Philo new [re: pablopicasso]  

I'm sure he'd disagree - then insult random members of your family.

Nothing Is New



forgetthatim50
(wild eyed peoploid)
09/11/04 11:02 PM
Re: LOW: Most Experimental Popular Album of the 20 new [re: Adam]  

on the other hand,i was looking through the 1999 edition of rockhound and they gave what they call Outside a woof! along with Buddha but give tonight 1 bone



Diamond_Dave
(cracked actor)
09/12/04 07:56 AM
Re: This is TOO Easy... new [re: NoControl]  

The one thing No Control has clearly missed here is this....

Bowie never really was and NEVER will be popular in the USA because he is a Brit. Secondly, Zappa NEVER had a mainstream audience to piss off like Bowie did wiht Low. Thirdly, the USA has what, 200 million people? Don't you think it would be common practice for a local act to out-sell other acts from differant parts of the world with ease?

Elvis has sold 700 million records in the USA..and ONLY 100 million through the rest of the world. Does this evidence not tell you that being an American artists is half the battle to topping sales lists?

When Bowie released Low many fans were lost. What record has Zappa released that had his fans going.. "What the devil is this?"



Please check out my Bowie Bootleg Site...
... http://www.geocities.com/bowieboyz/bowieondisc.html

Marquis
(acolyte)
09/12/04 05:06 PM
This is even easier! new [re: Diamond_Dave]  

In reply to:

Bowie never really was and NEVER will be popular in the USA because he is a Brit.


I think the Beatles, The Who, Led Zeppelin, Eric Clapton, and Radiohead might find fault with your logic.

Sadness is for poor people.

poorsoul
(acolyte)
09/13/04 07:16 AM
2 + 2 = 5 new [re: Marquis]  

What's logic got to do with it?

No Refunds



Diamond_Dave
(cracked actor)
09/15/04 07:44 AM
Re: This is even easier! new [re: Marquis]  

How can you say Radiohead has set big sales in the States? Or The Who? Led Zep and Clapton have more a US sound than they do British.

Face facts son, UK acts have fuck all chance of EVER selling well in the States. Hold on, maybe Elton has done well? Anyone?

Let's go and research some more ;)



Please check out my Bowie Bootleg Site...
... http://www.geocities.com/bowieboyz/bowieondisc.html

Marquis
(acolyte)
09/15/04 11:54 AM
Thank Your Lucky Oops! new [re: Diamond_Dave]  

Well, I just lost the longer, more biting, and better researched version of this response, but in a nutshell:

I can say Radiohead sell well in the States because they do. As do all of the bands I mentioned, regardless of whether you deem them to be 'British sounding' enough to qualify. And do I even need to think about mentioning Coldplay?

The bottom line is that you're a bigot and an idiot who wants to believe that Americans have a xenophobic avoidance policy on British music, when it simply isn't the case. The problem is yours, doucheface.

Sadness is for poor people.

twister
(acolyte)
09/15/04 03:29 PM
Well, on my list, it'd be pretty LOW new [re: Adam]  

I think the best popular-experimental albums generally shouldn't even sound experimental any more. After all, the most important form of experimentation I think is clearly that which expands the boundaries of that which can be considered 'popular music'.

The first two Roxy Music albums are thus strong contenders, with the marriage of Ferry's relatively straight pop/rock leanings and Eno's ambitions in crafting sound-scapes, ambience and left-field pop. Their music was wildly experimental yet also very popular, also paving the way for the future popularity of - arguably even finer acts - the Talking Heads and Joy Division.

Though if I were to name one album, based on Adam's criteria, it would be Brian Eno's full-length solo debut, Here Come The Warm Jets, full of new sounds, complex off-kilter structures and free-associative song-writing all the while boasting a perversely pop-heavy sensibility. Thirty years down the line, while still exciting in the creative process, one of it's biggest triumphs is that it would sound right at home alongside the work of the Super Furry Animals, or the mid-nineties experimental-side of Blur. Many albums pertain to 'push the envelope', but Here Come The Warm Jets is an album which, in retrospect, smugly speaks for itself in having succeeded.

The Beatles of course do deserve a big honourable mention, for getting some of the more experimental albums of the sixties to the top of the charts. With The White Album they invented the commonly accepted "rules" of the double-album, and while Sgt. Pepper's is discredited more and more with every passing year it nontheless remains the point in mainstream pop where it was announced okay to tackle any genre, and with as much whimsy as you'd like. Though Revolver is the album that really deserves The Beatles nod in my mind, intoxicatingly experimental in it's eclecticism, approaches and song-writing matter. To fail to get caught up in the creative excitement of "Tomorrow Never Knows" - which still sounded cutting edge when The Chemical Brothers re-interpreted it, some thirty years later - is to lack appreciation for popular-experimental work, period.

The Beach Boys also deserve a warm round of applause, Brian Wilson practically defines the whole nature of popular-experimental music, being an artist constantly driven to experiment and create but always with the intent of making music that would be beautiful. The Beach Boys were often complex, but never challenging, and more fool anyone who finds that a flaw. From the incredible harmonies (results of a series of experiments, for all forty years of pop culture can lead one to take them for granted) to the very birth of progressive pop (aka prog-pop) music and incorporations of classical elements: which would sure come in handy on the B-side of The Beatles' Abbey Road, released some three years after Pet Sounds.

Pet Sounds would, of course, be the obvious choice of nomination for The Beach Boys, but arguments about as strong could be made for either The Beach Boys Today! or Smiley Smile, based on preference.

In terms of even Adam's tailor-made-for-Bowie criteria, I'm not sure Bowie has much of a fighting chance against the above choices, or more. I shan't even start with Pink Floyd.

I could be a genius if I just put my mind to it.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | (show all)
*Threaded Mode
Jump to

Teenage Wildlife Davie Bowie | Email Us! Forums powered by WWWThreads v5.1.5perl

Teenage Wildlife Home Page Bowie's music Info on Bowie Other Media Have your say! Search the Site Help me!


Toolbar (Interact)

Etete Systems