Talk:Trout Mask Replica

Original release

it would be cool to indicate what was on each side of the original vinyl release - but it is not easy to find this info (i only have the cd) i know that side one ends with moonlight in vermont side two begins with pachuco end ends with dali's car side three begins with but which song is the last on that side? i will endeavour to find out ...

<^>v!!This album is connected!!v<^>

• All song titles serve as redirects to this album, have their own pages, or have been placed at the appropriate disambiguation pages.--Hraefen ^Talk 23:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

And exactly how is Zelda's Lullaby relevant to this? --46.9.126.74 (talk) 17:52, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Piero Scaruffi

Why did we delete the link to Piero Scaruffi's review of this album? Scaruffi gave this record a 9.5 out of 10 and once said "At the end of the millennium it becomes more and more evident that Trout Mask Replica is the only record of rock music worth listening to."

The 9.5 rating is so rare that as of 2007, Scaruffi has only given it to 3 (out of the 5000+ he's reviewed) albums: Trout Mask Replica (1969), Faust's eponymous debut (1971), and Robert Wyatt's Rock Bottom (1974).

Ilike1954rcamodels 00:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I've re-added the link. - Steptb 30 Sep 2007

look, it's illogical to only replace the links to reviews by him to albums by bands he didn't like, ok. on those beefheart albums are plenty of other reviews and he's not on the list for reviewers anymore so replace them. and he's, i say it again, NOT a professional music critic like Rober Christgau for example, it's just like my dad making an inet site and then tell you what he thinks of all the albums he heard in his life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.173.230.15 (talk) 18:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

it's like this: Scaruffi is just a guy with a lot of time on his hands running a website. The guy doesn't get published in any music magazines or papers so why should his reviews be considered professional? His writings are also clearly biased against popular music, regardless of how well researched they are. Music is not a science, you cannot approach it as one. The best critics approach their subjects from all angles, he only approaches it from one. All negative, no positive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.173.230.15 (talk) 18:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

every time i see Scaruffi oh so important opinion pop up in articles like these i LOL. (and yet i like the guys guts and appreciate his site) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.211.63.178 (talk) 20:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I think Scaruffi has sufficiently entered the internet music consciousness that his ratings and opinions DO matter. Whether or not he gets paid to do what he does has no bearing on the importance he has assumed in some circles. Also, Scaruffi isn't necessarily biased against popular music. he's given 9/10 to Springsteen, 9/10 to Dylan, he even gave 8/10 (still a huge deal) to Alanis Morissette for goodness sakes that album had 5 hits and is one of the best selling albums ever. The man likes what he likes and we shouldn't get rid of his opinion just cause people don't like it. If anything, Scaruffi's ratings are valuable for an alternative opinion that isn't necessarily influenced by anything other than his own critical opinion. Also, he's not solely a negative type of reviewer. I highly suggest reading his review of Bob Dylan and more specifically Blonde on Blonde; it's one of the best reviews I've ever read. Heylittlehouse 25 April 2010

He's NOT a recitable critic, he's not on the wiki list for music critics. it was agreed there that only on albums that have no other reviews his can be used, here are enough others, so i will now delete this guys review. There's a reason why i started the discussion on the music rating page that made him an unprofessional critic, anybody who hates on the Beatles without any real reasons and just by citing wrong things about what they did when (like saying the beatles copied the byrds sound, while the byrds only started to exist as what we know as the byrds because of seeing a hard days night). So, as long as there are all those other reviews he has to be deleted, his review is not any better than me making a website and rating albums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.34.160.224 (talk) 10:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Please leave personal bias out of Wikipedia. I read Scaruffi's page on The Beatles and The Byrds after your comment, and nowhere do I see "the beatles copied the byrds sound" or anything of that regard. Yes, Scaruffi does not appreciate The Beatles as much as you, but that does not discredit him from critiquing music. The fact that TMR received a 9.5 AND is Scaruffi's no. 1 rock album of all time is very important. The fact that Scaruffi has reviewed over 8,000 artists and written books over the material does not make some average blogger. I'm looking at this from an objective standpoint. I don't agree with Scaruffi on everything, but his inclusion is important considering his knowledge and expertise on TMR. 128.62.207.130 (talk) 18:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Scaruffi is the most recitable critic on the internet. He is the only critic that knows about the existence of a lot of subgenres like Krautrock or Post Rock. Robert Christgau is just a blind Beatles fan when you put him next to Piero Scaruffi. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I think of Scaruffi as one of our great critics. He has seen and/or reviewed literally thousands of albums and movies, and just because his reviews have not been published in any magazine does not mean he doesn't have anything reliable or notable to say. Most people who dislike Scaruffi feel that way because they think he's too strict (usually on the Beatles) -- if the masses love the Beatles, likely no magazine that wants to make money will feature him. That's little more than an issue of popularity, and popularity doesn't determine how good or bad a critic is. He values originality and innovation more than most other professional critics, and looking at his all-time lists can help you discover some excellent music that it would've taken much longer to have discovered (if having discovered it at all) without his website. I had no idea who Captain Beefheart was before visiting his website.

Another thing that takes him out of "unprofessional blogger" territory is the outstanding level of work and commitment from just one man. Even I still disagree with multiple ratings/reviews he's done, but whether or not his opinions are unconventional or strange, clearly he is far more prolific than just about any American critic in the known world that's generally considered professional. Anyone care to add all these to the mix: published author, university lecturer, subject of a New York Times (one of America's most-read newspapers) article named "The Greatest Website of All Time?"[1] All of these differentiate him from bloggers and the like. Now, back to TMR. As of 2014, it is one of only three albums he has given a 9.5/10, out of thousands that he's reviewed. I would think that would be pretty darn notable. For these reasons, I ask that the deletion of Piero Scaruffi's opinion on this album (as well as on the Safe as Milk page) be reverted. AndrewOne (talk) 03:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Structure

Ok Boris, looking good so far. Here's what I think the article needs.

1. Background
   • This section seems mandatory in album FAs. We should put stuff about line-up changes and the move to the trout house here
   • Any chance of getting a photo of the house?
2. Composition/production
   • Composition : DVV's methods; Drumbo's notes from Grow Fins
   • Production: just details about the recording, probably not much more than the current third and fourth paragraph here
3. Music and lyrics
   • Separate section about the music, musicians playing in different metres, etc.
   • Melodies and lyrics cribbed from other music
   • Mention some specific lyrical themes; I think the 33 1/3 book has some stuff about these
4. Release/aftermath
   • Mention Amougies festival?
   • Contemporary reviews: any more of these? There's probably something to be had from the Lester Bangs one, although it's mostly an exercise in name-checking jazz musicians (might fit better in the music section)
   • More concrete information about Peel's playing the record and its getting to #21 on the UK charts; didn't he play a track off the record every week because he wasn't allowed to play the whole thing in one go? Have to check that
   • Maybe something about relationship with Zappa, Hot Rats, etc.
5. Legacy
   • It's easy to slip into trivia with these sections; I think we should avoid mentioning specific artists who've been 'influenced' by the record and just stick to general comments like what we've got now. Mention Langdon Winner's essay in Stranded?
   • We should probably mention the reputation the album commonly has among uncomprehending yahoos; this kind of thing.

I guess this is probably similar to what you have in mind, I find it's useful to have this stuff pinned down up front. Let us know what you think. Flowerparty^☀ 19:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Album cover?
It's all about the music, of course, but some lines about the cover would be nice.

Van Vliet?

The article starts referring to Beefheart as "Van Vliet" without indicating that they are the same person. This ought to be fixed, either by explaining that Van Vliet is Captain Beefheart, or by just referring to him as "Beefheart" throughout the article. john k (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

• I also thought this could use clarification so I added a parenthetical in the lead to explain that Capt. Beefheart is Van Vliet. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Reliable source?

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58nPEe-TU-w

Masterpiece, magnum opus

While it's true that many writers will claim that Trout Mask is Captain Beefheart's one and only masterpiece, his magnum opus, there's plenty of dissenting opinions among prominent critics and music writers. Robert Christgau, Lester Bangs, Trouser Press come to mind, but there are more. It's likely his most influential album, but "masterpiece" or "magnum opus" implies that it's superior to and unequaled by every other Beefheart album, an opinion which is far from unanimous. Xelkman (talk) 10:14, 10 March 2019 (UTC)