Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:08 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 9:26 pm
Posts: 19
Early in his career, I thought Frank didn't like the Beatles but then he played with Lennon and on the '88 tour he covered a lot of their tunes. I also saw a Larry King interview with Frank where he mentions he liked them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 5:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 2243
Really? I'd love to see that.
Anyway, according to some of the vets around here (who certainly know more about this then I do) Zappa also praised The Beatles early in his career, pre WOIIFTM, even going so far as to call 'Revolver' one of his favorite albums of the year.

Even so, I don't think WOIIFTM is a put down on the Beatles, neccesarily, but what they stood for (in Zappa's eyes, anyway). He did call 'I Am The Walrus' one of his favorites.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 6:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 7:29 pm
Posts: 9605
fz: i'm influenced positively and negatively. i've heard a lot of music i just despise

q: like the beatles?

fz: i didn't hate them. i actually like two or three of their songs. i just thought they were ridiculous. what was so disgusting was the way they were consumed and merchandised. no music has succeeded in america unless it was accompanied by something to wear, something to dance or a hairdo. a phenomenon is not going to occur unless you can dress up to it...

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 6:08 pm 
Offline
Banned
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:25 pm
Posts: 4071
Location: Silver Spring, Maryland
.....not to mention

http://globalia.net/donlope/fz/songs/I_ ... _Hand.html

_________________
"If Frank Zappa cut a fart and mixed it to stereo, I'd buy it!" - jimmie d


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:28 pm
Posts: 2674
Location: in the tiny dirt somewhere
The Texas Motel medley was one of the highlights of the 88 tour. Frank mutated three Beatles songs (Norwegian Wood, Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, and Strawberry Fields Forever) to tell the then-breaking story of Jimmy Swaggart's trysts with prostitutes.

But no recording of the medley was ever released commercially, so the only record we have of it is on bootlegs.

Those same bootlegs reveal that Frank wasn't just pounding on the Beatles. From the very first show of that tour, Ike sang a more-or-less straight version of "I Am The Walrus." Even after the Swaggart story fell off the news and the Texas Motel medley appeared less frequently, the band continued playing "I Am The Walrus" every other show, all the way through the end of the tour.

_________________
_________________Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 6:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 8:37 am
Posts: 663
Location: New Jersey, USA
GaryMuffins wrote:
he played with Lennon and on the '88 tour


Lennon died in 1980, Zappa covered some Beatles songs in 88. I think you mean that they played in 1971.

I have also heard several times that Freak Out influenced Sgt. Pepper to an extent.

_________________
"If you wind up with a boring, miserable life because you listened to your mother, your Dad, your priest, to some guy on television, to any of the people telling you how to do your shit, then you DESERVE it."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2008 7:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:55 am
Posts: 1270
I have a book by Paul Zollo with a Zappa interview from 1987 where he says that the only Beatles songs he liked were "Paperback Writer" and "I Am The Walrus."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:36 pm
Posts: 8
I remember an interview were frank said inept chick rock trio the shaggs (!) were better than the beatles

_________________
www.myspace.com/seanryanwoodward


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:37 pm
Posts: 2841
Location: Toronto
I'm sure when they were "competing" (or rather active in the same medium) and The Beatles with their producer were getting credit for "mind blowing advancements" that had been child's play to Frank since Studio Z he was a little more resentful of them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 6:48 am
Posts: 6385
Location: Your Mom's Box
r_a_Z_Z wrote:
I'm sure when they were "competing" (or rather active in the same medium) and The Beatles with their producer were getting credit for "mind blowing advancements" that had been child's play to Frank since Studio Z he was a little more resentful of them.


this is exactly the reason why the Beatles SUCK!! They got way too much credit for shit only because they were so popular. People tought they were so innovative (THEY WEREN'T) because they didn't know any better. They were a fucking boy band.

_________________
Make your checks payable to QUENTIN ROBERT DeNAMELAND, Greatest Living Philostopher Known to Mankind.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 8:03 pm
Posts: 6153
Location: Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania
jaypfunk wrote:
r_a_Z_Z wrote:
I'm sure when they were "competing" (or rather active in the same medium) and The Beatles with their producer were getting credit for "mind blowing advancements" that had been child's play to Frank since Studio Z he was a little more resentful of them.


this is exactly the reason why the Beatles SUCK!! They got way too much credit for shit only because they were so popular. People tought they were so innovative (THEY WEREN'T) because they didn't know any better. They were a fucking boy band.

This is true to a point. If it was not for George Martin, The Beatles would not have lasted as long as they did. Or been as successful.

_________________
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:21 pm
Posts: 467
The Beatles were a pophit boyband initially and their pop
success financed a comfortable, creative (possibly drug inspired)
output which was skillfully harnessed and musically
arranged with foresight and invaluable focus
by Mr Martin.

Zappa never had the money or audience nor a
producer to guide him to success.
He created an audience, struggled for money and
made his records in total contrast to the FabFour.

He was an underdog in the music world,
in relation to The Beatles. An underdog, but one
fuelled by great self determination and
natural genius musically, always technologically
aware and marketing his work accordingly.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:21 pm
Posts: 467
Zappa is my musical hero, but I can't honestly
say his version of 'I Am The Walrus' outplays
the Beatles original recording. I think it was
more an affirmative nod to an inspired ceation.

I think he would have liked to have recorded
a version that surpassed the original, but in my
own opinion, he didn't.

Having said that, Zappa delivered heaps more
dynamic and musically challenging music than
The Beatles did, personally speaking.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 9:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 11:37 pm
Posts: 2841
Location: Toronto
Frank also wrote better pop songs but these are only things I would bring up to someone totally frothing over The Beatles because I see no reason to hate on a group I love. :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 2:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:07 pm
Posts: 5691
Location: Closer than I Appear
Eric Vaxxine wrote:
The Beatles were a pophit boyband initially and their pop
success financed a comfortable, creative (possibly drug inspired)
output which was skillfully harnessed and musically
arranged with foresight and invaluable focus
by Mr Martin.

Zappa never had the money or audience nor a
producer to guide him to success.
He created an audience, struggled for money and
made his records in total contrast to the FabFour.

He was an underdog in the music world,
in relation to The Beatles. An underdog, but one
fuelled by great self determination and
natural genius musically, always technologically
aware and marketing his work accordingly.


Exactly. Agree 100%

_________________
Let's hear it again for the London Philharmonic Orchestra!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:11 am
Posts: 3689
NOT the beatles were a rough and ready rock act originally, the played in rugged bars in germany.

_________________
A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 5:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:21 pm
Posts: 467
feetlightup wrote:
Eric Vaxxine wrote:
The Beatles were a pophit boyband initially and their pop
success financed a comfortable, creative (possibly drug inspired)
output which was skillfully harnessed and musically
arranged with foresight and invaluable focus
by Mr Martin.

Zappa never had the money or audience nor a
producer to guide him to success.
He created an audience, struggled for money and
made his records in total contrast to the FabFour.

He was an underdog in the music world,
in relation to The Beatles. An underdog, but one
fuelled by great self determination and
natural genius musically, always technologically
aware and marketing his work accordingly.


Exactly. Agree 100%


Thanks for your reply.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 12:32 am
Posts: 63
Location: Australia
The barcelone (live) I am the walrus, is hilarious!

_________________
The first word in this song is Discorporate, It means to leave your body.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:35 pm 
Offline
Banned
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 7813
Location: Underneath Virginia
BRAVO SIERRA wrote:
NOT the beatles were a rough and ready rock act originally, the played in rugged bars in germany.


Bingo.

[size=0]Isaac[/size]

_________________
I want dis little pussy
Baby wants some o' dis
And some o' dat
Don't treat me, baby, like your
Any old Alley Cat
Alley Cat, Alley Cat


Jimmie D Fan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:40 pm
Posts: 6984
Location: South wales
Eric Vaxxine wrote:
Zappa is my musical hero, but I can't honestly
say his version of 'I Am The Walrus' outplays
the Beatles original recording. I think it was
more an affirmative nod to an inspired ceation.

I think he would have liked to have recorded
a version that surpassed the original, but in my
own opinion, he didn't.

Having said that, Zappa delivered heaps more
dynamic and musically challenging music than
The Beatles did, personally speaking.

The Beatles Never played The walrus live concert :wink:

_________________
Arf you out of your fucking mind.Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the beatles?
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 7119
Location: exile
what a bunch of bullshit negative posts about the beatles.

the beatles were great. and you all know it. 8)

anyway, zappa said this:
Quote:
paul zollo: 'if you had to name a few songs written by other people that you consider to be great, what would they be?
zappa: "I liked 'subterranean homesick blues' by bob dylan, I liked 'paperback writer' by the beatles and 'I am the walrus.' and no one may not underestimate the impact of 'louie louie,' the original richard berry version."

link

_________________
"bit of nostalgia for the old folks."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 2:41 pm
Posts: 15121
Who argues musical taste? There's lots of bands that I like that other people don't, and vice-versa. It absolutely doesn't matter whether the artists are dumb as shit or geniuses.

_________________
One of the sanest, surest, and most generous joys of life comes from being happy over the good fortune of others.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the beatles?
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 7119
Location: exile
calvin2hikers wrote:
Who argues musical taste? There's lots of bands that I like that other people don't, and vice-versa. It absolutely doesn't matter whether the artists are dumb as shit or geniuses.

exactly. I was thinking of posting something to that effect, but I couldn't bother.
a lot of people don't like frank zappa, but they can still acknowledge and respect his talent as an artist/composer (at least some people I know).

my post before yours, calvin, was meant more tounge-in-cheek, or whatever it's called... (sarcastic, maybe)...

_________________
"bit of nostalgia for the old folks."


Last edited by Lumpy Gravy on Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:52 pm
Posts: 2065
As a person that, within the last five years, has bought CD reissues of almost every Beatles album, and subsequently has had to sell them for food, I can attest to the validity of The Beatles.

Were they pop? Yes, mostly...but their songs managed to be cool without being silly. The arrangments and recording values were excellent. Were they part of a counter-culture that was co-opted by capitalist and sold back to the rebels? Most assurredly.

The White Album...bestest Beatles.

Another good band is Steppenwolf.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: the beatles?
PostPosted: Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 2:41 pm
Posts: 15121
Lumpy Gravy wrote:
calvin2hikers wrote:
Who argues musical taste? There's lots of bands that I like that other people don't, and vice-versa. It absolutely doesn't matter whether the artists are dumb as shit or geniuses.

exactly. I was thinking of posting something to that effect, but I couldn't bother.
a lot of people don't like frank zappa, but they can still acknowledge and respect his talent as an artist/composer (at least some people I know).

my post before yours, calvin, was meant more tounge-in-cheek, or whatever it's called... (sarcastic, maybe)...


It wasn't directed at you.

_________________
One of the sanest, surest, and most generous joys of life comes from being happy over the good fortune of others.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group