Reply
  • rvi

    for me hes very consistent with several major masterpiece albums. much more an "albums artist" than a "songs artist" i think. especially since a lot of the albums really work as one whole rather than a compilation of songs (Uncle Meat, Hot Rats, Burnt Weeny Sandwich, We're Only In It for the Money etc.)

    up until about 1982 i think everything is at least very good except for the brief Flo and Eddie period in 1971 with 2 live albums that are f***ing TRASH imo. so like 33 for 35 good/great albums

    Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't think he's a "songs artist" but I think he has more great songs scattered throughout many of his albums than great concise albums (which he has, including some of those you mentioned). Zappa the man is much more interesting, he's the kinda of guy you get into after The Beatles and TVU and start saying stuff like "he was the real counter-culture artist of the 60s", which is still true, and the fact that he was saying things like this back then is fascinating (more relevant than ever, see: "lil nas x". works with the film industry too)

    Nowadays, even if I'll never stop appreciating Zappa, I catch myself listening to less FZ and more Beatles (the earlier albums, the best ones) or even TBB or Todd Rundgren, it doesn't get less counter-culture than this, but I feel like they are far more talented songwriters even if not exactly the most proficient with their instruments.