Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Sat Aug 30, 2014 10:16 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 3:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 3:50 am
Posts: 67
Disco Boy wrote:
unclemeat69 wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
EVERY composer or songwriter works with bits of ideas and then chains them together, refines them, etc., before the composition or song is complete.

What a pointless thread.

FZ would re-use those ideas in other pieces, making his music more modular than music of other composers.


You think other composers/writers never did that?

Not as structurally, no.
That's why I say more modular.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 9:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:03 pm
Posts: 5908
Location: Pouting for you? Punky Meadows, pouting for you?!!
Beethoven, Brahms and beyond provide examples of large format composers. I know exactly what Arkay is getting at. The traditional extended sonata form is a large format compositional form. Composers of that era often based large movements of larger works such as symphonies on a single small motive. Like the opening movement of Beethoven's fifth symphony. In that sense, Zappa was most definitely not a large format composer. This does not mean that composers more modern than the afore mentioned could not write large format compositions. Stravinsky went through a phase of writing large format compositions in the traditional sense but he also wrote large format compositions that were seemingly much more avant grade.

In modern and less formal composition, the source of the individual structural elements while seeming disparate may not turn out to be so when looking a little deeper into what binds them together. Zappa used organisational principles that gave his works a certain coherence and he was capable of, and did produce, large format compositions. Just because you don't understand what makes it so doesn't mean it isn't.

Cheepnis could easily be a movement in a large format work.

_________________
The way I see it Barry, this should be a very dynamite show.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 8:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3539
Location: Vancouver, BC
unclemeat69 wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
You think other composers/writers never did that?

Not as structurally, no.
That's why I say more modular.


Of course they did...

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 7:29 pm
Posts: 9578
the forum killed arkay wrote:
...I really want to stay away from using Opera ...

... So, if we change Themes every few seconds and each theme has little to nothing to do with adjacent themes, then we no longer have an evolution, but randomness...The Randomness is limited by the Composition, indeed must be secondary to the Composition.
All these concepts were utilized by FZ in his compositions at times...

...But, the individual events of Greggary or BTM often act independently of the rest of the composition, even if they do still relate to CC. I suppose it is only logical that in order for there to be integrity of CC, then individual compositions MUST play a secondary role to CC, as a subset of CC...


good thread; just to get on the same page, do these qualify as large-format compositions: thick as a brick, supper's ready & close to the edge ¿¿ rather than the rock opera [aka concept album] tommy

on random compositional technique, if themes change every few seconds, but in a somewhat consistent pattern, the randomization becomes secondary to the composition, the listener can anticipate and comprehend the theme changes ... in approximate; zappa's random note sequences played for random lengths of time & tied together by solos loses it's randomness as long as the random pattern is continued


unclemeat69 wrote:
That's why I say more modular.
as unclemeat69 noted a couple of times, zappa used modules to build songs ... there was a vinnie interview/clinic where he says zappa had blocks to be inserted at strategic points in songs, also during umrk rehearsals zappa would direct band members to cue-in these numbered pre-rehearsed modules; he didn't call them modules, or loops, but same concept

arkay, you're saying btm or gp are an assembly of well-known pieces interwoven with cc, agreed; are there any monster zappa songs that go beyond extended jams and have minimal conceptual continuity ¿

let's put thingfish back on the table; ok, it re-engages songs from 3 or 4 of his older albums, so it can't stand-alone, but almost ¾ of the material is unique to thingfish and in addition to the story, the thingfish format is consistent through all songs ... this one is extra-large

how about the ocean is the ultimate solution ¿ it's a monster composition, not a lot of cc, stands alone more or less, and has several distinct parts woven together; the intro, acoustic section, twangy bridge section, bass solo, bass solo with acoustic guitar, electric guitar solo with & without acoustic guitar, the outro


_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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