How do I understand this album?

>>70745073
you don't, that's the whole fucking point...

>>70745112
So am I supposed to just listen to it and say "ahh that's so weird, that's so extravagant, quirky... I love it"?

>>70745222
No, you're supposed to acknowledge the experimentation on this album. Songs like Ella Guru, Pena, China Pig are not to be taken seriously. Think of it more as an abstract and abrasive Zappa album.

File: listens_to_trout_mask_replica_once.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>>70745331
>it's sounds like shit, it's so experimental... wow... what a masterpiece
webm related

You just have to familiarize yourself with the techniques used in it

I tried listening to this and didn't like it, but after a couple months of being really into noise/noise rock I came back to it and was blown away by the sheer texture of it

>>70745073
you're supposed to either enjoy it or not enjoy it. I liked it on the first listen, the instrumentation was pleasant to my ears, i didn't have to stochholm myself into liking it, and i was a big fan of the memes

honestly you just have to put aside that it sounds kinda whack and just roll with it. literally babby's first experimental album, if you can't appreciate it in some form or another maybe you're just not cut out for it (which is doubtful, since anyone with half a brain could 'understand' this if they tried)

>>70745073
why the fuck do newfags overthink this album and experimental music in general? just listen to it

Listen to Pachuco Cadaver and Veterans Day Poppy

If you still don't like it then go listen to Daft Punk

>>70745564
I did and it sucked and I'm curious why so many people on /mu/ say that it's brilliant.

>>70745627
>other people have different tastes and preferences than me
WOW! truly a shocking mystery

>>70745073
don't take it (too) seriously
laugh out loud...

>>70745627
>I'm curious why so many people on /mu/ say that it's brilliant.
it's a meme because a senile self proclaimed music """"critic"""" and pedophile Scaruffi said it's his favorite album, so we ironically pretend we like it just to fool the newfags into listening to it.
No one actually enjoys it

>>70745673
This is blatantly not true. It was pleasant and fun to discuss when the board has a whole discovered it. But then people found the scaruffi review and just like every other album this board finds it got memed to death.

File: 88690231fafe417fb22aebc819005158.png (1MB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 800x800px

>Captain Beefheart is the most important musician to rise in the Sixties, far more significant and far-reaching than the Beatles, who only made pretty collages with material from the public domain, when you get right down to it; as important, as I said, for all music as Ornette Coleman was for jazz ten years ago and Charlie Parker 15 years before that, as important as Leadbelly was for the blues Cap teethed on.
What did Scaruffi mean by this?

>>70745380
At least make your baits interesting. It's not like this hasn't been posted many times before.
4/10

File: IMG_8367.jpg (44KB, 640x782px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x782px

It's just a case of the Emperor's new clothes where idiots pretend to like it because they don't want to look like plebs but in reality it's fucking SHIT.

>>70745811
he was quoting someone else

>>70745073
Here's an explanation I've posted here earlier:
>There are certainly some unpleasant and maybe out of place songs (Hair Pie: Bake 1), I agree. But there are also some memorable and enjoyable songs that represent the nature of the album perfectly - Moonlight on Vermont, Pachuco Cadaver, Ella Guru, Frownland. Their intention was to deconstruct Delta blues and blues rock to their roots (just the sound, just the attitude of it) and introduce avant-garde, jazz, free jazz and experimental motifs. There's polyrhytmic drumming, which is an integral part of free jazz, then there are slide guitar licks and straight up blues licks. Captain's voice might be off putting and harsh on this album, but he's a great blues singer, which is definitely showcased on his less critically and slightly more commercial albums (Unconditionally guaranteed, Bluejeans & Moonbeams). If you're familiar with Howlin' Wolf, Captain's voice is Howlin' Wolf x10.
>Try listening to his first album - Safe as Milk. It's a great blues rock album and although it's an indication of things to come, it's still accessible and is one of the best in his discography. I understand that it's really hard to appreciate this album and similar albums if you're not a musican. That's not to say that you need to be a musican in order to enjoy and appreciate music. And of course, you don't have to like every single album you've heard. Polyrhytmic drumming is common in free jazz, but not in rock and blues, so that's why the rhythm may sound off to you. Polyrhytms are two separate rhythms played at the same time - which is impressive from a technical standpoint and impressive in the context of time in which the album was made.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyrhythm
There are examples of how they're used and by whom. It's an interesting read.

File: 1469581008284.jpg (115KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 413x395px

>mfw I realize that people only pretend to like this album

>>70745975
>he's a great blues singer, which is definitely showcased on his less critically and slightly more commercial albums (Unconditionally guaranteed, Bluejeans & Moonbeams)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyITTLeLRR4
true as shit, for some reason his voice always vaguely sounded like George Carlin to me

>>70745627
It essentially was a prototype for all experimental rock and punk to come. It sought to push the 60s boundaries of what could be considered rock music.

I guess part of my problem with it is that it's not actually the cacophonous nature of the album that bothers me. I'm trying again with it right now, and I'm able to accept how noisy the album is pretty quickly.

The problem for me is that beneath the noise, the album sounds like The Band or Janis Joplin or Canned Heat or something.

I really can't stand that country hippy shit. Maybe it's because I'm originally from Arkansas and grew up around potheads who lived in trailer parks and put tie-dyed shit up on their walls and smoked cigarettes inside their trailers with the windows shut.

>>70745981
I honestly think that for most people it has meme value and that's what they like about it. It's more an lmao ironic enjoyment of the record rather than appreciating the many moving parts involved. Same thing also happens here for Death Grips, where people that wouldn't touch abrasive music with a 100 yd pole are all of a sudden into this group that does wildly abrasive stuff for the ironic memes.

You're supposed to blare it in the direction of your neighbors house when he refuses to turn down his shitty rap music.

>>70745073
Drugs, lots of drugs.

File: 1448328399027.jpg (69KB, 680x449px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 680x449px

>found this album years before I ever went on /mu/
>enjoyed it
>started going on /mu/
>all discussion of the album turns into this

It's not fair

This thread is why no one takes /mu/ seriously

>>70745380
can anyone link the source? watched the vid on yt a long time ago but i can't find it

with a shovel, in the dirt, with your head, bury it.

>>70746292
its better that way

>>70745073
understand that it's doing everything that rock music isn't "supposed" to do. no one is playing in time or cohesion with one another, and it's not meant to sound pleasant or something you can tap your foot to. It breaks the rules (for arguably, the sake of breaking them) and that is exactly how the artist intended it to be.

That's my take on it, and why I personally love the album despite it being such a meme.

>>70746670
This is a bullshit argument as the record's pretty simple in its structure and progression. The average usually good Beatles track shits on it in that regard.

>>70745380
It's not like it's harsh noise dude. If you can't into rhythm and atonality, maybe this album just isn't for you

>>70746706
not if you take a look at the microstructures apparent in the music

>>70746762
What microstructures? It's either a series of riffs, all repeated pretty often, or it's something closer to a verse chorus bridge structure. Most of the album's complexities show up in its rhythms.

>>70746797
the extremely subtle amounts of variation over timing.. constantly varying swing, the little sonic quips in the guitar, 'mistakes' in every instrument.

especially the timing strikes me as very much microtemporal. they are always just a bit next to a precise beat or completely apart from it, even

>>70745073
>>70745112
>>70745222
>>70745331
>>70745474
>>70745493
>>70745547
>>70745717
>>70745811
>>70745975
>>70746040
>>70746270
>>70746292
>>70746670
>>70747191
"Trout Mask Replica" entertains a pretentious audience who fakes "getting it". The same fops seem to display an image that this album is esoteric, but instead end up projecting themselves as cocky people who try too much and fall flat on their face and ultimately fool no one.

Inclusion is life's greatest joy, isn't it, you sad bastards?

File: 1485194361691.png (313KB, 632x479px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 632x479px

>>70745840
dumb frogposter

>>70747259
Thank you for your valuable input and a truly original opinion.

>>70747191
Nothing to do with the overall structure itself though, just the rhythms as I said.

>completely apart from it, even
Not always. Depending on which track you're listening to, either the bass or one of the two guitars plays perfectly in time with the drums.

>>70747351
>Nothing to do with the overall structure itself though

that really depends on what you define as 'overall structure'

>Not always

no but don't you experience moments any kind of static pulse just is gone?

>>70747415
>that really depends on what you define as 'overall structure'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_structure

>no but don't you experience moments any kind of static pulse just is gone?
Nope, there's usually one thing or another throughout the record that can always be followed, usually the drums along with one of the other parts attached to it. First time going through it may make one think otherwise especially with how in your face Frownland is, but yeah there's definitely a pulse.

>>70747490
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_structure

sorry but that doen't cut it for me.

structure is in everything that is.
just ignoring micro-rhythmical events that are obviously original and interesting is lame.

people still have to catch up with how the rhythms are actually structured on trout mask replica. in the way of subtle swing and placement.

>no but don't you experience moments any kind of static pulse just is gone?
Nope, there's usually one thing or another throughout the record that can always be followed, usually the drums along with one of the other parts attached to it. First time going through it may make one think otherwise

dude try to -bop your head- to some moments. you can't find a steady pulse often.

i see your point and its a good one but come on you know what i mean.

>>70747596
>just ignoring micro-rhythmical events that are obviously original and interesting is lame.
I was never ignoring them. Literally the first thing I praised about this record.

>structure is in everything that is.
Your argument was that it was trying to be not rock, while its structure is clearly a rock structure. This ain't Zappa or a long prog track. For what it's worth I actually think this is a good thing about the record.

>dude try to -bop your head- to some moments. you can't find a steady pulse often.
Not gonna lie, since it's been a while since I touched it, it would take me some time to get it right. But after a bit I am sure I or anyone else can do it. But then, I did discover this record ten years ago so I am pretty used to it even then.

>>70747702
>I was never ignoring them. Literally the first thing I praised about this record.
i stand corrected

>Your argument was that it was trying to be not rock

i never said this. but in a way its definitely moving away from rock as well being inspired by it.
but yeah they were probably even a basis for more rough sounding and harder rock later on.

And I know what you mean, the structure is -an sich- pretty simple. but in its intricacies lie a whole world of time-placement to discover

and that's a great thing about it i agree.

>Not gonna lie, since it's been a while since I touched it, it would take me some time to get it right. But after a bit I am sure I or anyone else can do it. But then, I did discover this record ten years ago so I am pretty used to it even then.

ok i understand your connection to this album is valuable and my point might seem a bit naive.. but if someone would get a metronome and tried to get it in time for even most of the music it would be a very hard task

>>70747877
>but if someone would get a metronome and tried to get it in time for even most of the music it would be a very hard task
For sure; a couple of the tracks it would require pausing the track, then changing the number on the metronome, then going.

>>70747942
i imagined a continuously going metronome that you adjust in time as it goes

Look at his work as a painter long first. He was always a painter foremost and also firstmosteh. #don

>>70746340
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L34S4Tt1EuQ
here you go

>>70745073
multiple illegal drugs

>>70749026
If you can enjoy any album only after drugs then it's piece of shit.

Wine is difficult to judge without a context.

If I have read 10 Modernist classics and you have read 3, I have a better understanding of the context because I have more to work with. I have more variables to compare.

To spell it out, you will understand why Trout Mask Replica is significant only after:

1. You can properly distinguish Rock music from Jazz, Classical, Folk, and Avant-Garde.
2. You understand that if something exists, it must be categorized or deemed anomalous, but never ruled out.
3. You are familiar with the work and ideology of Frank Zappa.

Bonus: You are familiar with the historical and cultural events of USA in the 1960s.

TL;DR Here is the shortcut for understanding Beefheart. Ask for clarification.

>>70746130
Don't talk shit about Death Grips

>>70749474
I agree with your lil' layout, good friend. But don, also in his painting, was coming from that intuitive angle. Just adding, not detracting. Well ok, also detracting. I just think you're attributing a 'bit much' to a loner in the desert, set on illustrating said life. Beyond that, don saw more in frank than vice versa, sadly enough for franky.

>>70749474
Also, i disagree that good critique depends on number of variables to compare to. But, again, you prosper a nice grid for general understanding. Tdarsaggodpoi.

File: 1484808833131.jpg (39KB, 492x500px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 492x500px

I actually like the album.
You just need to pay attention to the polyrhythms, obviously, I doubt a Pitchfork-trained Indie kid would be able to understand it.
And more, it's not even Don's best album.

>>70748851
forced autism

>>70749667
A great critic understands his context. A great musician fills a different role.
http://www.scaruffi.com/phi/syn21.html
>>70749722
I believed this for a long time. If you'd like to save the effort, friend, heed my advice. Exposure to disparate variables > deep understanding. The trick is, the former must come first, then the latter becomes the most important.

>>70749778
>>70747259

>>70749891
And so two ships passed in that gooknighd

get taste

it's an amazing album and if you don't understand it, you're a pleb


>>70745331
this guy is a huge fucking pleb. Ella Guru and Pena are excellent songs. This guy listens to Radiohead and probably lists "music" as a hobby on his resume.