jaypfunk wrote:
Plook wrote:
Is this music possible without a percussionist?
with the right kind of set list, sure. it will be great. it will also give them a chance to stretch out a bit and not be so sterile. remember the late 1975-1976-early 1977 FZ bands were a 5 piece for most of those tours.
True. Except that the critical consensus (viz "We're Only In It For The Touring" website) is that these bands were mere transitional lulls between the 1973-74 and the late 1977-1978 peak experiences. The question is whether you think those transitional five-pieces were in any way equivalent to the book-ending six-to-seven-to-eight pieces in terms of musical quality? It's true the late 1975 band was less sterile than the late 1974 band, but your mileage may vary as far as the "stretching out" factor.
I think Zappa Band had to be minimally a five-piece group. Because FZ himself couldn't play rhythm and sing at the same time. Nor did he particularly enjoy playing the rhythm, so no wonder he got extra guitars later. But there was a big gap between FZ first giving up rhythm and hiring the first real stunt guitarist (Warren Cuccurullo and then S.Vai). Which means, for instance, much of the music live on the 1978 tour was left guitar-free. Mainly complex instrumentals, but also some of the tunes that initially depended on FZ rocking out on rhythm guitar: just compare the 1978 version of Magic Fingers with synth overload and then the 1980 version with added Vai oomph.
In any case, the standard case of having a simple rock power quartet lineup, that could have been augmented with vibes or horns, was out of question for FZ. That's why the 1988 band had 12 whooping members. That's definitely a completely different case than, say the 1969 Soft Machine consisting of organ trio and a brass quartet, or Chicago Transit Authority with rock quartet + brass trio.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
