Warning: Actual Zappa Content

11 views
Skip to first unread message

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Jeez, my morning break from all the hard work I'm puttin' down for you people to
enjoy, and I come to affz to relax and it's papapapapapapapa -- SHIT!

Anyone, wanna talk Zappa? Although, I'll be addressing some "musically
technical" issues in this post, I'm trying to put this out there as a legitimate
query to all FZ fans, particularly those that own BOTH versions of Cruising With
Ruben And The Jets....

Who knows, maybe PAPA might even have something worthwhile to contribute to this
discussion:

I just received a most delightful item in the mail (thank you thank you thank
you JB) -- the original vinyl mix of Cruising With Ruben And The Jets which I
have not heard in 30 years.

So, I've been listening to my Old Masters copy since 1985, okay? It wasn't
until 1969 that my Zappa addiction took hold, and it was Freak Out, WOIIFTM,
Uncle Meat and Hot Rats that commanded my attention more than this particular
release (at that time)...

But oh how I've grown to love this release -- particularly in the sense of the
historical setting of its actual release -- think about it, a 2-LP set of
goofy-sounding "pop" songs merging into controlled chaotic freak-out music, a
rock oratorio, WOIIFTM (adjectives desert me), first "solo" effort with
orchestra and dialog and then

He regresses back to this music -- which he clearly recorded for his own
pleasure as much as anything else! We can know this for sure simply by
comparing the four tracks which are common to FO and Cruising. The Cruising
versions leave the "goofiness" of the FO versions at the door (for the most
part)...

So, keeping in mind that your devoted curator has been listening to Arthur and
Chad's overdubs for 13 years now, with no actual memory of the original
version --

I just listened to the original Cheap Thrills.

Now, those of you so inclined, who haven't yet done so, may want to click on the
link to my website at the bottom of this message and navigate your way to 03 (in
Version 1.0). You will see that I am not real shy about taking FZ to task for
the overdubs on this release. I think he fucked up. And his claim that the
masters were in such bad shape that you couldn't detect the bass and drums
certainly can't be valid given the re-release. Unless some new technology
rescued those tracks, I just don't believe it -- I can hear Roy and JCB fine --
and in fact prefer their "organic" performances over what Arthur and Chad did IN
ALMOST EVERY CASE!

Now, as I say, I just listened to the original Cheap Thrills.

Uh, there's a plunking going on there that I guess is Roy. There's a little
clicking that could be construed as drums, hard to say. Wow! The vocals are
fine, in fact in the slow intro, I can hear some of the inner voices a little
better than on my Old Masters version.

But (and we finally get to the gist of my post) -- I think Arthur's acoustic
bass part is WONDERFUL! In fact, I had just assumed that he was copying Roy's
old part (that's what happened for the most part in WOIIFTM) -- but this is
totally new music!

Now is it historical memory that allows me to LOVE what Arthur did in 1985 on
this release but not on WOIIFTM????

Also, the piano on the original (A-D6/4-A7-D6/4 over and over again) doesn't
sound nearly as clear as it does on the remix. Is it a NEW piano part, or was
Frank really able to pull the original up into the mix (it sounds great on the
remix) out of that mess????

Questions, questions, questions. Ah, but it's a great time to be alive....

Now I've got to listen to the rest of it and go and add a CD/vinyl section to my
05 analysis.

See ya. Feel free to add opinions, facts or conjecture.

Or continue researching the Papa/Ninja/Webern Code....

Lewis Saul
TFZMRI
http://www.mypages.com/lsaul
ls...@azstarnet.com

Chris Ekman

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Lewis Saul wrote in message <6s3vf7$cbd$1...@polaris.azstarnet.com>...

[Ruben vinyl vs. CD, snipped]

Lewis, you'll want to go to Johan's site, namely
http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-59501/ , then look up Ruben in the Vinyl vs. CD
FAQ. There's a very knowlegdable article there by some bootleggers (wonder
of wonders) that details all the many changes on Ruben, called "Way Beyond
Just Drums 'n' Bass." (I may as well give the exact URL, which is:
http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-59501/misc/way_beyond.html

About Cheap Thrills, it notes the new bass line, and notes that the outro is
extended much longer. It doesn't say anything about new piano, but it might
be- FZ did add new keyboards to other songs.

I regret to say that I've not heard the original Ruben. I hope its as much
better as the original Money was.

(I was going to offer you the aid of my newly-acquired FRANK ZAPPA SONGBOOK
in your Ruben scholarship. Then I realized that it uses the Freak Out!
arrangements- but I wanted to gloat anyway. Ppphpbht! I got a FRANK ZAPPA
SONGBOOK, and y'all ain't gooot one, and you can't have no iiiice cream, and
your father's on the welllfare...)

Chris Ekman
Working...@worldnet.att.net

Mark McKee

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
I don't understand. What does this have to do with PAPA/Ninja. I think you
may have posted to the wrong group. And who is this Zappa guy I keep
hearing about??
Panky

Lewis Saul wrote in message <6s3vf7$cbd$1...@polaris.azstarnet.com>...

snipped due to irrelevance

Bossk (R)

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Lewis Saul wrote:

> Now, those of you so inclined, who haven't yet done so, may want
> to click on the link to my website at the bottom of this message
> and navigate your way to 03 (in Version 1.0). You will see that I
> am not real shy about taking FZ to task for the overdubs on this
> release. I think he fucked up. And his claim that the masters
> were in such bad shape that you couldn't detect the bass and
> drums certainly can't be valid given the re-release. Unless some
> new technology rescued those tracks, I just don't believe it --
> I can hear Roy and JCB fine -- and in fact prefer their "organic"
> performances over what Arthur and Chad did IN ALMOST EVERY
> CASE!

And it's not just their performances, it's the weird sound Zappa achieved.
The drum sound on that album - wow. The drum sound on that album - wow! But
about those masters being damaged - it could well be true. Of course, it
wasn't true about WE'RE ONLY IN IT FOR THE MONEY, but we don't know about
RUBEN & THE JETS. Where do you reckon the fact that you hear Roy and Jim
fine anywhere fits in?

> Now, as I say, I just listened to the original Cheap Thrills.
> Uh, there's a plunking going on there that I guess is Roy.

In fact, it isn't: Zappa played all the instruments himself on "Cheap
Thrills" and "No No No".

> But (and we finally get to the gist of my post) -- I think Arthur's
> acoustic bass part is WONDERFUL! In fact, I had just assumed
> that he was copying Roy's old part (that's what happened for the
> most part in WOIIFTM) -- but this is totally new music!
>
> Now is it historical memory that allows me to LOVE what Arthur did
> in 1985 on this release but not on WOIIFTM???

I don't know what it is, but I kind of feel the same way. I hate the sound
of it, but there are instances on RUBEN & THE JETS - the intro to "Cheap
Thrills", for example - where he finds little phrases that are at least just
as good as the original part, even though they're very different.

Oh, I should misspell something. Esophagos.

--- johan <wik...@mbox301.swipnet.se>

"I should let you know, my grandmaster has strange habits."
- Lo Jui, SHAOLIN VS LAMA, Hong Kong 1984 (English dub)

dukeo...@ibm.net

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
In article <6s3vf7$cbd$1...@polaris.azstarnet.com>,

"Lewis Saul" <ls...@azstarnet.com> wrote:
> Now, as I say, I just listened to the original Cheap Thrills.
>
> Uh, there's a plunking going on there that I guess is Roy. There's a little
> clicking that could be construed as drums, hard to say. Wow! The vocals are
> fine, in fact in the slow intro, I can hear some of the inner voices a little
> better than on my Old Masters version.

Part of the joy of it for me is the seeming _amateurishness_ of the
performance -- and you can't actually tell whether those clicks are drums or
a scratch on the record! It's like the record comes pre-stressed.

>
> But (and we finally get to the gist of my post) -- I think Arthur's acoustic
> bass part is WONDERFUL! In fact, I had just assumed that he was copying Roy's
> old part (that's what happened for the most part in WOIIFTM) -- but this is
> totally new music!
>

My beef with the remix is that, for the most part, the ambience of the
digital bass & drums is almost totally unlike the ambience of the rest of the
instruments -- in most cases (I think Cheap Thrills is one of the less
glaring remixes on the album), it _sounds_ like new bass and drums are
playing along with a really old recording. It's jarring, and destroys the
illusion that Zappa was trying to create on the original release.

BTW, in some key areas on WOIIFTM Arthur's bass is doing something totally
different than the original mix -- cf. the intro to What's the Ugliest Part of
your Body (reprise).

> Now is it historical memory that allows me to LOVE what Arthur did in 1985 on

> this release but not on WOIIFTM????
>
> Also, the piano on the original (A-D6/4-A7-D6/4 over and over again) doesn't
> sound nearly as clear as it does on the remix. Is it a NEW piano part, or was
> Frank really able to pull the original up into the mix (it sounds great on the
> remix) out of that mess????
>
> Questions, questions, questions. Ah, but it's a great time to be alive....
>
> Now I've got to listen to the rest of it and go and add a CD/vinyl section to
my
> 05 analysis.
>
> See ya. Feel free to add opinions, facts or conjecture.
>
> Or continue researching the Papa/Ninja/Webern Code....
>
> Lewis Saul
> TFZMRI
> http://www.mypages.com/lsaul
> ls...@azstarnet.com
>
>


--
--
Visit the FZ CC Book of Days at
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Cabaret/9519/index.html

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum

AJ Wilkes

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Lewis Saul <ls...@azstarnet.com> wrote:

: Now is it historical memory that allows me to LOVE what Arthur did in 1985


: on this release but not on WOIIFTM????

I'm not so sure - the first Money I heard was the Barrow/Wackerman rhythm
section, and thought it stuck out like a saw thumb. It sounded like the only
original thing left was the vocals, and I didn't really like the album
overall.

Now that I've heard the 1995 CD, I can say that it sounds more cohesive, eg
all the instruments blend together well, and there seems to be lots of
little extra bits and pieces that were removed from the B/W rhythm section
version - but... it still sounds like shit! Compare it to Absolutely Free or
Freak Out, and it definitely sounds like it's lost something along the way.
In most cases the B/W version sounds clearer, ie vocals and piano and
whatever else, but still has that 1980s rhythm section honking around in the
background.

What they 'could' have done was locate and purchase a mint original copy of
the vinyl from original release date, and master from that on a tippety-top
quality record deck. Apparently George Martin said he would have been happy
to do that for the Beatles albums, after the first set of CD re-releases.

BTW - did anything ever come of that laser system for playing vinyl records?
ie they use a laser to read the groove and the vinyl itself remains
unscathed.


-jk-
'Have you ever tried playing slap bass with a saw thumb?
"RZZZZZZ!"
'

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
>Where do you reckon the fact that you hear Roy and Jim
>fine anywhere fits in?
>

I was speaking of WOIIFTM, meaning the overdubs weren't necessary,
proof=original LP on CD

> Now, as I say, I just listened to the original Cheap Thrills.
> > Uh, there's a plunking going on there that I guess is Roy.
>

>In fact, it isn't: Zappa played all the instruments himself on "Cheap
>Thrills" and "No No No".
>

>
That's very interesting. What's your source for that information? And do you
know what that plunking is? At first I thought it was all low E string on a
guitar, but at other times it sounds like it could be a bass. In any case, IT
SUCKS, compared to what Arthur put down.

I've listened to the whole thing three times now, and my opinion is probably
exactly the opposite of how I feel about WOIIFTM. I "appreciate" the -- for
lack of a better word at the moment -- "organic" nature of the original, but I
can't imagine what Bob Stone meant by "Stooge Rock" ?!?!?!? I think, in this one
instance, Zappa managed a masterful remix which adds great beauty to the
original (the touch of bringing up the piano in Cheap Thrills, as discussed
above, for example; and the nicely, not-overdone room reverb added)...

>Oh, I should misspell something. Esophagos.

You're not gonna let up on the spelling thing, are you J?

Btw, which one of those large-breasted women did you go to school with? The one
with the nipple showing or the other one?

>

Stan

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Lewis Saul said:

>Uh, there's a plunking going on there that I guess is Roy. There's a little
>clicking that could be construed as drums, hard to say.


I always took that clicking on "Cheap Thrills" to be phoney "surface noise"
to remind the listener that we were listening to an archaic type of music,
as if from a scratchy old 45. Frank also simulated the sound of a needle
being dragged across vinyl a couple of times on WOIIFTM as a segue between
songs (I forget which ones).

In the digital age, of course, these artifacts lose their meaning.

--Stan

If we let HMOs run the post office, 43 million Americans wouldn't get any mail.

JWB

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
>But (and we finally get to the gist of my post) -- I think Arthur's
acoustic
>bass part is WONDERFUL! In fact, I had just assumed that he was copying
Roy's
>old part (that's what happened for the most part in WOIIFTM) -- but this is
>totally new music!
>
>Now is it historical memory that allows me to LOVE what Arthur did in 1985
on
>this release but not on WOIIFTM????

I have always firmly believed that Arthur had no say in this matter. I
suspect that FZ directed his almost every move. I have always had no problem
with the WOIFTM remix because it seems to me that FZ made it annoying ON
PURPOSE, with all the funk bass and stuff. Most people seem to approach it
with the attitude that FZ was trying to make it sound identical to the 60s
version only played better. Seriously, if you approach the album with the
attitude that FZ is TRYING to annoy, the remix is much more bearable. I have
said it before and I'll say it again. THE WOIFTM REMIX RULES.

It also needs to be addressed again that the Ruben tapes WERE NOT DAMAGED.
FZ added new bass and drums to make the album "more appealing" and more
"stooge rock" because he "already had the studio set up that way after doing
WOIFTM, so what the fuck". As I have always said, this is almost definitely
part of the real reason for also overdubbing WOIFTM , along with his
disapproval of the original performance.

--

John W. Busher
muds...@ptdprolog.net


Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
JWB wrote:
>
>
> I have always firmly believed that Arthur had no say in this matter. I
> suspect that FZ directed his almost every move. I have always had no problem
> with the WOIFTM remix because it seems to me that FZ made it annoying ON
> PURPOSE, with all the funk bass and stuff. Most people seem to approach it
> with the attitude that FZ was trying to make it sound identical to the 60s
> version only played better. Seriously, if you approach the album with the
> attitude that FZ is TRYING to annoy, the remix is much more bearable. I have
> said it before and I'll say it again. THE WOIFTM REMIX RULES.

You have lost your mind.

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Chris Ekman wrote:
>
> Lewis Saul wrote in message <6s3vf7$cbd$1...@polaris.azstarnet.com>...
>
> [Ruben vinyl vs. CD, snipped]
>
> Lewis, you'll want to go to Johan's site, namely
> http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-59501/ , then look up Ruben in the Vinyl vs. CD
> FAQ. There's a very knowlegdable article there by some bootleggers (wonder
> of wonders) that details all the many changes on Ruben, called "Way Beyond
> Just Drums 'n' Bass." (I may as well give the exact URL, which is:
> http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-59501/misc/way_beyond.html
>

I'd like to note that, although the author is very good at pointing out the
differences betwixt the two versions, he does not know how to interpret them
correctly. For example, when the author hears, say, a guitar part that wasn't
in the original mix, he assumes it's a "new overdub".

For "Love of My Life" the author states: "The sound of someone turning a
sheet of paper at 01:54-56
has quite inexplicably been completely altered on the CD, and sounds more like
someone dropping a ping-pong ball on a table-tennis table." The fact that
this is probably just the result of the different mix bringing previously
unheard noises to the forefront and burying others is, apparently, completely
lost on him.

While this is not particularly important, it does cause me to roll my eyes
upward often while reading the article.

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Chris Ekman wrote:
>
> Lewis Saul wrote in message <6s3vf7$cbd$1...@polaris.azstarnet.com>...
>
> [Ruben vinyl vs. CD, snipped]
>
> Lewis, you'll want to go to Johan's site, namely
> http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-59501/ , then look up Ruben in the Vinyl vs. CD
> FAQ. There's a very knowlegdable article there by some bootleggers (wonder
> of wonders) that details all the many changes on Ruben, called "Way Beyond
> Just Drums 'n' Bass." (I may as well give the exact URL, which is:
> http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-59501/misc/way_beyond.html
>

On reading further into this article, I've noticed that it is way, WAY out to
lunch on many different things. Especially when the author thinks the
acoustic guitar is a keyboard, and Ray Collins' high sustained vocals are
"horns". This person is out of their fuckin' mind.

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Michael Pierry wrote in message <35E5CE24...@home.com>...

>
>You have lost your mind.

No, his ears just receive auditory molecular disturbances which cause his
brain's pleasure centers to react in a manner inconsistent with your own (or
others)....

His mind is his mind your is yours mine is mine.

My whole point with this thread was to try and get more feedback about the major
issue confronting FZ fans with the two different versions of these two releases
(WOIIFTM and Cruising) --

So, for the record, I vote for ORIGINAL woiiftm and the REMIX of cruising...

However, as I detail on my site, there are "moments" in woiiftm where the remix
does something MUCH better than the original (a great deal of the "musique
concrete" on Money sounds MUCH better on the remix, for example)...

Although I just listened to Original Ruben for the first time since 1968 today,
I already can see that there ARE moments on the original that are perhaps
SUPERIOR to the remix in some way (not to mention those little nuggets that just
got CUT on the remix)...

bottom line:
nice to have all four versions....

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Michael Pierry wrote in message <35E5D6CE...@home.com>...

>For "Love of My Life" the author states: "The sound of someone turning a
>sheet of paper at 01:54-56
>has quite inexplicably been completely altered on the CD, and sounds more like
>someone dropping a ping-pong ball on a table-tennis table." The fact that
>this is probably just the result of the different mix bringing previously
>unheard noises to the forefront and burying others is, apparently, completely
>lost on him.
>
>While this is not particularly important, it does cause me to roll my eyes
>upward often while reading the article.


Gawd, Michael -- I'll let Bossk (R) defend himself -- but he's just DESCRIBING
sounds! I'm pretty sure he knows what a "mix" is, okay!

But, the funny thing is (and this is all EXTREMELY SUBTLE
MUST-HAVE-HEADPHONES-ON stuff) -- the little paper swoosh occurs right after the
words "they never lie"

On the remix -- I don't hear a ping-pong ball -- but I DO hear what sounds like
a solenoid switch being depressed immediately afterwards (while the Ray is
singing "tell me you need me" -- in fact right between the words "me" and "you")

Anyone?

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Lewis Saul wrote:
>

>
> Gawd, Michael -- I'll let Bossk (R) defend himself -- but he's just DESCRIBING
> sounds! I'm pretty sure he knows what a "mix" is, okay!

But why would he defend himself? He didn't write that article, he transcribed
it from a bootleg CD.

>
> But, the funny thing is (and this is all EXTREMELY SUBTLE
> MUST-HAVE-HEADPHONES-ON stuff) -- the little paper swoosh occurs right after the
> words "they never lie"

Yeah I can hear it.

>
> On the remix -- I don't hear a ping-pong ball -- but I DO hear what sounds like
> a solenoid switch being depressed immediately afterwards (while the Ray is
> singing "tell me you need me" -- in fact right between the words "me" and "you")

Well, if I knew what a solenoid switch was... but I do hear something, most definitely.

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
Lewis Saul wrote:
>
> Michael Pierry wrote in message <35E5CE24...@home.com>...
> >
> >You have lost your mind.
>
> No, his ears just receive auditory molecular disturbances which cause his
> brain's pleasure centers to react in a manner inconsistent with your own (or
> others)....
>

I'm not talking about his ears, I'm talking about his weird theory that Frank
put funk bass on WOIIFTM just to be "annoying". I think that's crazy, but not
nearly as crazy as the things Miguel (aka "It Never Entered My Mind") comes up
with.

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
>
>Well, if I knew what a solenoid switch was... but I do hear something, most
definitely.
>

The PLAY button on your tape deck or CD is probably a solenoid switch. Only
this one sounds like the flipper of a pinball machine....

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
>nearly as crazy as the things Miguel (aka "It Never Entered My Mind") comes up
>with.

Ah, so that's the infamous Miguel! I complimented him on a post (mainly because
he went into some nice detail about Packard -- and give Watson credit, not many
knew about this [I didn't] until his book) and it seems to have set him off in
such a state of frenzy.

Sorry for misinterpreting two different posts of yours today!
We'll get it straight someday.

Idjit

unread,
Aug 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/27/98
to
What Frank did with remixing Ruben worked good. But on WOIIFTM , the original is
much better. Of course I've never heard the original Ruben LP. so I shut up now.

-Lonesome Cowboy Idjit = Speakin at cha


Bossk (R)

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Lewis Saul wrote:

> > > Now, as I say, I just listened to the original Cheap

> > > Thrills. Uh, there's a plunking going on there that I
> > > guess is Roy.
> >


> > In fact, it isn't: Zappa played all the instruments himself
> > on "Cheap Thrills" and "No No No".
>
> That's very interesting. What's your source for that information?

My citable source is Patrick Neve, who quoted Biffy on it, and I think the
original source is an interview with Frank, which I've read but can't cite.
I think it's the same interview where he says that "it was fuckin' murder to
make that record", if that rings a bell with anybody.

> And do you know what that plunking is? At first I thought
> it was all low E string on a guitar, but at other times it
> sounds like it could be a bass. In any case, IT SUCKS,
> compared to what Arthur put down.

I don't know what it is, but I don't think it sucks. I like Arthur's bass
line, but I like the plunking too.

> You're not gonna let up on the spelling thing, are you J?

No, I think it was despickable.

> Btw, which one of those large-breasted women did you
> go to school with? The one with the nipple showing or
> the other one?

To tell you the truth, I don't know which is which. I can't tell them apart
at all. I haven't given it that much thought.

Bossk (R)

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Lewis Saul wrote:

> Gawd, Michael -- I'll let Bossk (R) defend himself -- but he's
> just DESCRIBING sounds! I'm pretty sure he knows what a
> "mix" is, okay!

OK, here's my defense: I DIDN'T WRITE THE ARTICLE, I JUST TYPED IT IN.
(How's that for a watertight defense? :)

But I think both your comments on the article are mighty nice, and I'll
compile them and put them in the footnote section on that page later on. In
general, I agree with Michael on some points, and not on others:

> For example, when the author hears, say, a guitar part
> that wasn't in the original mix, he assumes it's a "new
> overdub".

That, for example, was a good point.

> For "Love of My Life" the author states: "The sound of
> someone turning a sheet of paper at 01:54-56 has quite
> inexplicably been completely altered on the CD, and sounds
> more like someone dropping a ping-pong ball on a table-tennis
> table." The fact that this is probably just the result of the
> different mix bringing previously unheard noises to the forefront
> and burying others is, apparently, completely lost on him.

My interpretation is that this fact (that it's a result of the different mix
etc.) is completely obvious to all people, and that the author's attempt at
a jocund tone is more or less lost on you.

> On reading further into this article, I've noticed that it is way,
> WAY out to lunch on many different things. Especially when the
> author thinks the acoustic guitar is a keyboard, and Ray Collins'
> high sustained vocals are "horns". This person is out of their
> fuckin' mind.

The guitar/keyboard mixup I probably agree with, but I'm not listening to
the album and I don't know witch (obligatory spelling error) track it's on
("How Could I Be Such a Fool?"?). But what about the horns? The author
mentions "horns" in discussion of "Deseri", "I'm Not Satisfied", "Anyway the
Wind Blows", "Jelly Roll Gum Drop" and "Stuff Up the Cracks", all of which
do have horns on the CD and/or vinyl. Where is it?

And if anyone wonders what we're talking about, here's the URL:

http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-59501/misc/way_beyond.html

Chris Ekman

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
JWB wrote in message ...

>Seriously, if you approach the album with the attitude that FZ is
>TRYING to annoy, the remix is much more bearable.

True. And if you approach Everclear, Snoop Dogg, Barbara Streisand and
Helmut Lotti with the attitude that they are TRYING to annoy, they too
become far more interesting. You can even view their annoyingness as an art
statement.

And yet... they still SUCK, don't they? SUCK. BALL-LESS, SOULESS CORPORATE
BITCHES- SUCKERS OF SATAN'S COCK, EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM.


At the risk of doing what I just upbraided Miguel for doing, I'm going to
claim that this was a marketing decision by Frank, not an artistic one.
"The kids today won't listen to a 1968 drum sound," he said in justifying it
at the time. Boy, was HE ever wrong. I've tried to be tolerant, but let's
face it, folks- the remix bites the bag.

As for Ruben... like Keneally (I think) said, what sense does it make to
modernize a record that's all about nostalgia?

Chris Ekman
Working...@worldnet.att.net

Chris Ekman

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Bossk (R) wrote in message ...

>Lewis Saul wrote:
>
> > > > Now, as I say, I just listened to the original Cheap
> > > > Thrills. Uh, there's a plunking going on there that I
> > > > guess is Roy.
> > >
> > > In fact, it isn't: Zappa played all the instruments himself
> > > on "Cheap Thrills" and "No No No".
> >
> > That's very interesting. What's your source for that information?
>
>My citable source is Patrick Neve, who quoted Biffy on it, and I think the
>original source is an interview with Frank, which I've read but can't cite.
>I think it's the same interview where he says that "it was fuckin' murder
>to make that record", if that rings a bell with anybody.


I seem to remember reading that Zappa also played all instruments on "Stuff
Up The Cracks," and bass on "Anything." These happen to be left intact on
the record, which lent credence to the theory that Zappa wanted to wipe away
the contributions of some particularly irksome ex-Mothers. But if he also
deleted some of his own playing, it maybe points to a more general
dissatisfaction with the limitations of the sound and performance.

But I could very well be wrong. Just ask Calvin.

Chris Ekman
Working...@worldnet.att.net

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Bossk (R) wrote:
>

>
> The guitar/keyboard mixup I probably agree with, but I'm not listening to
> the album and I don't know witch (obligatory spelling error) track it's on
> ("How Could I Be Such a Fool?"?). But what about the horns? The author
> mentions "horns" in discussion of "Deseri", "I'm Not Satisfied", "Anyway the
> Wind Blows", "Jelly Roll Gum Drop" and "Stuff Up the Cracks", all of which
> do have horns on the CD and/or vinyl. Where is it?
>

I neglected to mention in that portion of my commentary that I was referring
specifically to the author's comments on "Jelly Roll Gum Drop". The CD
version has no horn parts whatsoever (none that I can hear). And the
guitar/keyboard mixup is absolutely inexcusable, because what is plainly an
acoustic guitar is pushed way up in the mix and no keys are present
whatsoever. So weird. Almost makes me think this person is listening to a
different album than the one I have.

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Chris Ekman wrote:
>
> JWB wrote in message ...
>
> >Seriously, if you approach the album with the attitude that FZ is
> >TRYING to annoy, the remix is much more bearable.
>
> True. And if you approach Everclear, Snoop Dogg, Barbara Streisand and
> Helmut Lotti with the attitude that they are TRYING to annoy, they too
> become far more interesting. You can even view their annoyingness as an art
> statement.
>
> And yet... they still SUCK, don't they? SUCK. BALL-LESS, SOULESS CORPORATE
> BITCHES- SUCKERS OF SATAN'S COCK, EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM.
>

Thank you, Bill. Rockers Against Drugs suck! BTW, did you see the anti-drug
ad with the guy from Everclear? ;)

The Clonemeister

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Let's see, where should I begin?

First, I didn't have much say in the matter. I did tell Frank that it
seemed somehow sacreligious to me, because WOIIFT$ was one of my
favorite albums when I was in high school. But you have to try to look
at it from Frank's attitude. As an artist, one is seldom 100% satisfied
with one's art. Frank talked about what a drag it was back in the 60's
to make a record, that you only had a few hours to mix a whole album,
etc. He was also never satisfied with musicans' performances, especially
the old Mothers. At the time of adding the new bass and drums, he saw it
as an oppurtunity to finally make it right with modern technology. He
also had just gotten his studio together, and he did it becasue he
could. I still go on record as being against the whole idea, though! Why
did I do it? Because he told me to - I was only following orders...
sorry, folks...
Also,I do not play upright acoustic bass! That is someone else on Ruben.
I would also like to say that although I was against the new bass &
drums concept, it was an awful lot of fun for me to do. I got a chance
to hear the orignal tracks individually - very cool.
As for the funk style bass, Frank just seemed obsessed with that style
at that time. And the My Sharona lick was throughn into a lot of songs
around then because I knew the Knack drummer. By the way, do you guys
know that Bozzio is now the drummmer for the Knack? It's a small world.

JWB

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
> Mike Pierry wrote:
>I'm not talking about his ears, I'm talking about his weird theory that
Frank
>put funk bass on WOIIFTM just to be "annoying". I think that's crazy, but
not
>nearly as crazy as the things Miguel (aka "It Never Entered My Mind") comes
up
>with.

Well, I happen to think that a lot of people are just going along with the
crowd by rejecting the remix. It must be treated as a separate album to be
thoroughly enjoyed. I came to a revelation while listening to it a few month
back. I don't think that Frank was trying to replicate the original album,
because if he WANTED it to sound like the original album, he would have
remixed the ORIGINAL tapes, which WERE NOT really damaged. He lied because
he wanted to replace some instruments. So, common sense tells me that Frank
made the remix the way it is because he wanted it to sound that way.
Therefore, I think that the funk bass is intentionally annoying. When this
fact is accepted, the bass blends into the mix just fine.

Dispute that.

:P " "

RRAALLFF

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Chris Ekman" <Working...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
...

>
>But I could very well be wrong. Just ask Calvin.
>


What the hell do I know?


I think you should ask Miguel.


#:>)

JWB

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
> Arthur Barrow wrote:
>
>First, I didn't have much say in the matter. I did tell Frank that it
>seemed somehow sacrilegious to me, because WOIIFT$ was one of my

>favorite albums when I was in high school. But you have to try to look
>at it from Frank's attitude. As an artist, one is seldom 100% satisfied
>with one's art. Frank talked about what a drag it was back in the 60's
>to make a record, that you only had a few hours to mix a whole album,
>etc. He was also never satisfied with musicans' performances, especially
>the old Mothers. At the time of adding the new bass and drums, he saw it
>as an opportunity to finally make it right with modern technology. He
>also had just gotten his studio together, and he did it because he

>could. I still go on record as being against the whole idea, though! Why
>did I do it? Because he told me to - I was only following orders...
>sorry, folks...

I told you guys!

>Also,I do not play upright acoustic bass! That is someone else on Ruben.

Who was it?

It Never Entered My Mind

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
On 28 Aug 1998 07:00:37 GMT, rraa...@aol.com (RRAALLFF) wrote:

>Chris Ekman writes:
>...
>>
>>But I could very well be wrong. Just ask Calvin.
>>
>
>What the hell do I know?
>
>I think you should ask Miguel.


Nope. Not me....try asking that Pierry dude.

Gosh it feels so good to have a kill-file in Forte' Agent.

Tal

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Chris Ekman heeft geschreven in bericht
<6s515h$k...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>...

...

>At the risk of doing what I just upbraided Miguel for doing, I'm going to
>claim that this was a marketing decision by Frank, not an artistic one.
>"The kids today won't listen to a 1968 drum sound," he said in justifying
it
>at the time. Boy, was HE ever wrong. I've tried to be tolerant, but let's
>face it, folks- the remix bites the bag.

I like the remix album as much as the original. I had the remix years before
I finally bought the Ryko 95 version and it just struck me as being
different, somewhat alien. It's part of FZ's view on his whole body of work,
like xenochrony is.

I have another possible theory: maybe it was about copyrights and payment
of the original MOI. The release of cds was not covered in most contracts
from the 60ies and so new deals had to be made. Meanwhile, FZ was in battle
with some of the MOI from that time. By replacing tracks of the original
album, maybe FZ found a way around the claims. Me guessing here of course.

(This same thing being a problem with the release of the Old Masters, Ahead
Of Their Time and the BTB-set. Remember Arthur Barrow's call to GZ about
this?)


>As for Ruben... like Keneally (I think) said, what sense does it make to
>modernize a record that's all about nostalgia?

Maybe just *that* is a reason to do it.

Yours,
--Tal
_____________________________________________
e-mail : an...@cidanka.nl
web : http://www.cidanka.nl

Tal

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Arthur,

As I understand it you worked on WOIIFTM and CWR&TJ, right? Chad recorded
new drum tracks for other tracks too (like Regyptian Strut on Lather and a
couple of track on HIOS?). Did you work on other albums too? And do you know
of others who did?

Thanks,

Tal

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
AJ Wilkes heeft geschreven in bericht <6s49of$gh3$2...@cfs2.kis.keele.ac.uk>...
>
>What they 'could' have done was locate and purchase a mint original copy of
>the vinyl from original release date, and master from that on a tippety-top
>quality record deck. Apparently George Martin said he would have been happy
>to do that for the Beatles albums, after the first set of CD re-releases.


The cd-releases for the Beatles-albums were done in around 86/87. Compare
the Anthology cuts with the original Beatles-cds. Back when the Beatles-cds
were finally released they said that Martin had been in charge of the
remastering. Later Martin said that wasn't true, he had been involved but it
was an EMI-thing. With the today's technical possibilities it would be
possible to upgrade the original mastertracks. But you can run into problems
like the EMI/Ryko differences.

FZ's remixed/remastered albums often "suffer" from the techniques available
at that moment in time. Digital delays and reverbs made early mixes sound
different. And sometimes I get the feeling that whenever a new toy was
brought into the controlroom it was checked out on whatever it is they were
working on. To me that's what adds to the alien feeling of the
Barrow/Wackerman treated albums. I guess you can look at it two ways: a) you
release an album in its original mix, duplicating the techniques of that
time (so real reverb, tape echo, etc.) and just bring it up to 90ies specs
with EQ; or b) you take the music and try to turn it into a 90ies product
using all techniques now available.

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
JWB wrote:
>

> Therefore, I think that the funk bass is intentionally annoying. When this
> fact is accepted, the bass blends into the mix just fine.
>
> Dispute that.

Okay. To me, that is a really messed-up way of thinking. Obviously Frank was
going for a different feel than on the original album, but I just can't
imagine that anyone would put a CD out where the bassline for the whole thing
is INTENDED to be annoying. I think he thought it sounded cool.

The other part of your theory is that, if you accept that the bass is supposed
to be annoying, then it sounds fine. It gives me a headache just trying to
think that way. I swear to you that I have no idea how to do that. Sounds
like a 12-step program.

Maybe you should start a 12-step for people who don't like the WOIIFTM remix:

"Hello, my name is Mike, and I don't like the WOIIFTM remix."

"Hi, Mike."

--sobs--

>
> :P " "

And stop drooling on me!

Charles Ulrich

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
In article <6s516f$k...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>, "Chris Ekman"
<Working...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> I seem to remember reading that Zappa also played all instruments on "Stuff
> Up The Cracks," and bass on "Anything." These happen to be left intact on
> the record, which lent credence to the theory that Zappa wanted to wipe away
> the contributions of some particularly irksome ex-Mothers.

I don't think Roy Estrada was involved in the lawsuit or any other irksome
behavior. So the overdubs were a musical decision, not a personal one.

--Charles

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
The Clonemeister wrote in message <35E62A...@netcom.com>...

>Let's see, where should I begin?
>

Begin by congratulating yourself on being such an unbelievable musician, Arthur!

See, I knew a post with Actual Zappa Content would get the Cream of the Crop in
here!

>Also,I do not play upright acoustic bass! That is someone else on Ruben.

I just assumed it was you on Cheap Thrills -- come to think of it, I had that FZ
quote in my head, when he first met Patrick O' -- seeing him lugging around his
acoustic, and said something like, "Do you play that doghouse, guy?"

Could it have been Patrick? [after Patrick's time with FZ, but a possibility?]

Thanks for jumping in...

[from my analysis of Harry, You're A Beast]:

The '85 remix destroyed this precious moment in our nostalgic memory banks (the
arpeggios are far back in the mix -- Arthur is mixed way too loud (sorry, Art,
it wasn't YOUR FAULT! {no, Frank, I won't record this part -- you're ruining
your own music -- yeah, that might've worked well for your career!}), and we are
very happy to have the restored version just for these four bars of music!
The '85 bass part here is horribly sore-thumb material

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
The Clonemeister wrote:
>
> Let's see, where should I begin?
>

> Also,I do not play upright acoustic bass! That is someone else on Ruben.

Now THAT is interesting! Did you hear that, Lewis?


> As for the funk style bass, Frank just seemed obsessed with that style
> at that time. And the My Sharona lick was throughn into a lot of songs
> around then because I knew the Knack drummer. By the way, do you guys
> know that Bozzio is now the drummmer for the Knack? It's a small world.

I can hear that lick very prominently in "The Radio Is Broken". I always
wondered about it. ;)

BTW, "Tink Walks Amok" is great. Was that all written by Frank, or did you
have any input?

Tal

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Lewis Saul heeft geschreven in bericht
<6s6jvk$i8j$1...@polaris.azstarnet.com>...

...

>I just assumed it was you on Cheap Thrills -- come to think of it, I had
that FZ
>quote in my head, when he first met Patrick O' -- seeing him lugging around
his
>acoustic, and said something like, "Do you play that doghouse, guy?"
>
>Could it have been Patrick? [after Patrick's time with FZ, but a
possibility?]


Or maybe Jay Anderson (string bass on Thingfish)?


Yours,
--Tal
_____________________________________________
e-mail : an...@cidanka.nl
web : http://www.cidanka.nl

Visit the MK-BFD Review-o-rama at http://www.cidanka.nl/keneally/


Bossk (R)

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Michael Pierry wrote:

> I neglected to mention in that portion of my commentary that
> I was referring specifically to the author's comments on "Jelly
> Roll Gum Drop". The CD version has no horn parts whatsoever
> (none that I can hear).

And after listening to the CD, I agree whole-heartedly!

> And the guitar/keyboard mixup is absolutely inexcusable, because
> what is plainly an acoustic guitar is pushed way up in the mix
> and no keys are present whatsoever. So weird.

You're right - I can't hear any keyboards either.

What the author writes is that "There have been some horns and/or keyboards
(hopefully, none of that is a guitar) added in strategic places throughout".
Now, before I listened closely to the CD, I thought there had been horns and
a guitar added, and the guy was trying to make a joke about '80s guitar
sound being like keyboards, but when no horns have been added and the guitar
is so very acoustic, I realise that he (she?) must have been smoking in
front of a mirror! This guy needs more footnotes, and will get it. Thank
you, Michael!

Geir Corneliussen

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Lewis Saul wrote:
>
> The Clonemeister wrote in message <35E62A...@netcom.com>...
> >Let's see, where should I begin?
> >
>
> Begin by congratulating yourself on being such an unbelievable musician, Arthur!
>
> See, I knew a post with Actual Zappa Content would get the Cream of the Crop in
> here!

This thread was one of the best I have read so far.
WAOIIFTM has the MFU bass because FZ was obsessed by it.
All this makes a lot of sense, and answer many old subconscious
activities in my brain.
I like both mixes, but I prefer the original vinyl.
Thanks everyone. Time to start listening again.

Geir Corneliussen

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
Bossk (R) wrote:
>

>
> What the author writes is that "There have been some horns and/or keyboards
> (hopefully, none of that is a guitar) added in strategic places throughout".
> Now, before I listened closely to the CD, I thought there had been horns and
> a guitar added, and the guy was trying to make a joke about '80s guitar
> sound being like keyboards, but when no horns have been added and the guitar
> is so very acoustic, I realise that he (she?) must have been smoking in
> front of a mirror! This guy needs more footnotes, and will get it. Thank
> you, Michael!
>

You, sir, are very welcome.

JWB

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
>Okay. To me, that is a really messed-up way of thinking. Obviously Frank
was
>going for a different feel than on the original album, but I just can't
>imagine that anyone would put a CD out where the bassline for the whole
thing
>is INTENDED to be annoying. I think he thought it sounded cool.

But in this case annoying = cool.

It has already been established that FZ didn't like the original WOIIFT$ LP.
Reasons ranging from anger towards MGM for fucking up the album, the
original Mothers for playing like shit, and other stuff. The original album
was about STUFF HE DIDNT LIKE in the first place.

So, I think that FZ thought it was funny that he was "defacing" the original
album, and simultaneously adding sounds to it that he liked, like slap bass.
He was like, "hehehe. I'm gonna make Arthur play slap bass in "Absolutely
Free" because I can, and the crappy original instruments will be gone. And I
think slap bass sounds cool anyway. Hooray!" Does this make sense to anyone?
It basically supports what Arthur was saying, sort of.

JWB

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
>> As for the funk style bass, Frank just seemed obsessed with that style
>> at that time. And the My Sharona lick was throughn into a lot of songs
>> around then because I knew the Knack drummer. By the way, do you guys
>> know that Bozzio is now the drummmer for the Knack? It's a small world.
>
>I can hear that lick very prominently in "The Radio Is Broken". I always
>wondered about it. ;)

Also iat the end of Teen-age Wind, more prominently in the 1980 version.

Lewis Saul

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to
This stuff is gold, Arthur!

Thanks for sharing...

--

Fred Banta

unread,
Aug 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/28/98
to

Lewis Saul wrote in message
<6s6jvk$i8j$1...@polaris.azstarnet.com>...

>The Clonemeister wrote in message
<35E62A...@netcom.com>...
>>Let's see, where should I begin?
>>
>
>Begin by congratulating yourself on being such an
unbelievable musician, Arthur!


I'll second that. Arthur is awesome. I used to think
that based on the 'godlike' sound of Thunes' bass on
the 88 stuff he couldn't be matched nor replaced. But
when I saw AB play with Banned from Utopia earlier this
year, I changed my mind, Arthur could have absolutley
rocked the hell out of the 1988 band.

PS: for you west coast fans of the Twin Quasars of
Rock, they're playing the west coast starting with
Portland I think on the 8th of Sept. They'll be
appearing at the House of Blues in Hollywood on the
11th and the Coach House in San Juan Capistrano on the
12th.

Fred Banta fhb...@jps.net
One-Adam-Twelve, see the Zappa stuff at:
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Stadium/3025/e-hou
se.htm

Michael Pierry

unread,
Aug 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/29/98
to
JWB wrote:
>

>
> So, I think that FZ thought it was funny that he was "defacing" the original
> album, and simultaneously adding sounds to it that he liked, like slap bass.
> He was like, "hehehe. I'm gonna make Arthur play slap bass in "Absolutely
> Free" because I can, and the crappy original instruments will be gone. And I
> think slap bass sounds cool anyway. Hooray!" Does this make sense to anyone?
> It basically supports what Arthur was saying, sort of.
>

That sounds fine. Maybe I just didn't like the way you phrased it originally.

The Clonemeister

unread,
Aug 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/29/98
to
As I understand it you worked on WOIIFTM and CWR&TJ, right? Chad
recorded
new drum tracks for other tracks too (like Regyptian Strut on Lather and
a
couple of track on HIOS?). Did you work on other albums too? And do you
know
of others who did?

The only old albums I worked were Money & Ruben. I am not aware of other
musicians working on other albums, but that doesn't mean it didn't
happen.

AB

The Clonemeister

unread,
Aug 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/29/98
to
Or maybe Jay Anderson (string bass on Thingfish)?

I'm not sure, but I think it was Jay.

AB

The Clonemeister

unread,
Aug 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/29/98
to
BTW, "Tink Walks Amok" is great. Was that all written by Frank, or did
you
have any input?

All written by Frank. Of course a player always has input, but that is
not the same as composing. Recording it was fun. I would be recording
the lick to a click without knowing what was going to happen next. Frank
would say "Go up 2 frets...now!...get ready to go to the A
string...now!" Tink is derived from 2 other tunes - Atomic Paganin and
13. There was a killer expanded version of 13 written and rehearsed in
early 1980 with Vinnie but never played live. A similar arrangement has
now been recorded by Banned from Utopia and I believe may appear on
BFU's next release.

AB

The Clonemeister

unread,
Aug 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/29/98
to
So, I think that FZ thought it was funny that he was "defacing" the
original
> album, and simultaneously adding sounds to it that he liked, like slap bass.
> He was like, "hehehe. I'm gonna make Arthur play slap bass in "Absolutely
> Free" because I can, and the crappy original instruments will be gone. And I
> think slap bass sounds cool anyway. Hooray!" Does this make sense to anyone?
> It basically supports what Arthur was saying, sort of.


I see it like this:

Frank has this great new UMRK studio and he's spent days, maybe weeks
fine tuning what he believes to be a fabulous state of the art drum
sound. At the same time, after a long fight, he finally gets posession
of his old tapes. He listens to the tracks, and finds the drum sound to
be bad in his opinion. Like I said before, he was probably never happy
with the original drums in the first place. He puts 2 and 2 together and
comes up with this "great idea" to replace the drums. And while he's at
it, why not do the bass as well, Arthur knows all these tunes, right?

My opinion.

AB

JWB

unread,
Aug 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/29/98
to
Arthur's explanation makes the most sense.

AJ Wilkes

unread,
Aug 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/30/98
to
Patrick Neve <sp...@darkwing.uoregon.edu> wrote:
: On Sat, 29 Aug 1998, The Clonemeister wrote:

: > All written by Frank. Of course a player always has input...

: Wow, thanks for the post. "Tink Walks Amok" is one of my favorite songs,
: and definitely a high point of that underrated album.

: So.... why were you called Tink?

Perhaps he's got a Tinky Winky.


-jk-
'Gratuitous teletubbies CC'
-

Dave-o Thompson

unread,
Aug 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/31/98
to
> AJ Wilkes be askin': - did anything ever come of that laser system

> for playing vinyl records? ie they use a laser to read the groove and

> the vinyl itself remains unscathed.

AJ - it's still alive and kicking. Here's the URL:
www.issay.com/elp
Seems this Japanese company bought the rights to the
Fineal Laser Turntable, and they make 'em by hand
(according to the literature, they HAVE TO, and that
keeps the price up - and thus, making a coupla jillion
of them won't make them lower the price). Right now
they're asking $13,500 for one that plays 33's and 45's,
and $20,500 for one that also plays 78's (neither play
16 rpm's).


Sam and/or Karen Rouse

unread,
Aug 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/31/98
to
In article <35EA3FAA...@sprintmail.com>, Dave-o Thompson
<da...@sprintmail.com> wrote:

> AJ - it's still alive and kicking. Here's the URL:
> www.issay.com/elp
> Seems this Japanese company bought the rights to the
> Fineal Laser Turntable, and they make 'em by hand
> (according to the literature, they HAVE TO, and that
> keeps the price up - and thus, making a coupla jillion
> of them won't make them lower the price). Right now
> they're asking $13,500 for one that plays 33's and 45's,
> and $20,500 for one that also plays 78's (neither play
> 16 rpm's).

So do they play them OK? Is the sound more or less wickly? What if there
is the occasional wickly bit of detritus in the groove? What if it has an
Obi, but no Inner?

--
Sam and/or Karen Rouse ro...@teleport.com
alt.fan.frank-zappa RC5-64 team webpage:
http://www.teleport.com/~rouse/fz/rc5.html
Concert Tales:
http://www.teleport.com/~rouse/fz/

Dave-o Thompson

unread,
Aug 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM8/31/98
to
Sam and/or Karen Rouse wrote: So do they play them OK?

Is the sound more or less wickly?

Dave-o shrugs: I shoulda known this was coming...

Sam continues: What if there is the occasional wickly bit of
detritus in the groove?

Dave-o lights up like a Poindexter know-it-all: According
to the literature, crap in the grooves does cause an ungodly
nasty sound, so each player comes with a vacuum cleaner
(hey...just linked the Laser Turntable to CC!)

Sam continues this onslaught of tough questioning:


What if it has an Obi, but no Inner?

Dave-o sighs: Biffy? Wanna field this one?


dan the kitti man

unread,
Sep 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM9/1/98
to
Once upon a time in the faerie woods, in <rouse-
ya02318000310...@news.teleport.com>, ro...@teleport.com (Sam
and/or Karen Rouse) said...

> In article <35EA3FAA...@sprintmail.com>, Dave-o Thompson
> <da...@sprintmail.com> wrote:
>
> > AJ - it's still alive and kicking. Here's the URL:
> > www.issay.com/elp
> > Seems this Japanese company bought the rights to the
> > Fineal Laser Turntable, and they make 'em by hand
> > (according to the literature, they HAVE TO, and that
> > keeps the price up - and thus, making a coupla jillion
> > of them won't make them lower the price). Right now
> > they're asking $13,500 for one that plays 33's and 45's,
> > and $20,500 for one that also plays 78's (neither play
> > 16 rpm's).
>
> So do they play them OK? Is the sound more or less wickly? What if there
> is the occasional wickly bit of detritus in the groove? What if it has an
> Obi, but no Inner?

the laser turntable achieved good results.

--
===== dan the kitti man === surf.to/dankitti <-- actual web url

where would the music be without the pauses between the notes?
how could there be dancing without the pauses between the
motions? how could we breathe if we were constantly filled with air?

exhale to inhale again..

-- ana voog

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages