Pardon me for repeating myself, but Sgt Pepper is NOT a concept album. The Beatles have said that is started off that way but they couldn't be bothered to finish it. It's just a collection of songs. If there is a link between them then I can't see it.

I dont think that was Zappa's goal....

Of course it wasn't Zappa's goal - but there's no denying that very few CAN write songs like Lennon and McCartney did, otherwise everyone would and we'd be spoilt for choice.

I wouldn't say that Zappa COULDN'T write songs like that...

I would though - it takes a very rare talent, and formal composition methods are a hindrance to that sort of talent.

I believe he CHOSE not to.....

I agree that he chose not to try to follow that path - it's not a black and white argument

that wasn't what Zappa was about. His philosophy on music was COMPLETELY different......and YES of course the Beatles influenced more people than Frank Zappa.....and that's because Zappa was so "OUT THERE" and AHEAD OF EVERYONE ELSE......how the heck can you influence someone when you are lightyears ahead of EVERYONE!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!........and influence must be taken with a grain of salt.....Zappa was never about influencing people because he couldn't care less!!!....I mean lets be honest some bands were influenced by KISS.....so, once again influence means nothing to me.

Secondly what's wrong with not biting your tongue????.....what's wrong with ALWAYS expressing yourself???.....I'll answer that.....NOTHING!!!....hee hee.

Of course there's nothing wrong with that approach - I never said there was. There is no "wrong" approach to music. You completely misunderstand - I'm saying that you cannot compare the two types of genius, as they are in opposite forms of music.

There are 2 forms of music.

Music written as art and music written "for the people".

There's a lot of cross-over, of course, as in any genre, but those 2 forms stand. Music written as art tends to use formal compositional methods, whereas music written for the people is written more intuitively.

To compare classical music and folk music is hare-brained, IMO - and that is what you are doing comparing Zappa to the Beatles. 

Thirdly the Beatles are an IMPORTANT band in the history of rock and yes they did break alot of ground and broke down barriers....BUT, the Beatles ARE NOT the greatest rock band ever on planet earth.....In my humble opinion.

You're welcome to your opinion, but no band has ever created such waves in the world of rock music - or the world in general, especially with "folk" music of such high quality - and compared to other folk (read "pop") music, the Beatle's music is of an exceptionally high quality. That's why people are STILL influenced by them today and why they remain the greatest rock band ever.

.......ummmm......Cert, I beg to differ. I believe that Freddie Mercury was just as much the song writer as Lennon and McCartney. I believe Freddie was a melodic genius.

Very true indeed. It doesn't change my statement that there have been very few, however - so I don't think we differ at all on this .

.......You wanna talk about great song writers......Elton John, Billy Joel, Cat Stevens, Jim Croce.

None of them up there with Lennon and McCartney - or Mercury (IMO).

I respect the Beatles a GREAT deal and I admire their place in rock history....but the Beatles just don't touch me the way they touch you...that's all.

That's fair enough, but you cannot ignore the impact they had on the world that is still resonating through music in general.

Personally I can name ten bands right now that I think are BETTER than the Beatles (and I'll exclude Zappa to prove my point)....Gentle GIant, King Crimson, YES, Queen, Gong, Premiata Forneria Marconi, Mahavushnu Orchestra, Genesis, Emerson Lake and Palmer, and Colossuem II.

Hmm. All prog bands. That says a lot for your taste - and also quite a bit about how you appreciate music for what it is, as opposed to how much you like it. I'd be interested in your opinion on ABBA.

And when I say that Zappa was ahead of the Beatles, Im not trying to discredit the Beatles....Zappa was ahead of EVERYONE!!!

Only in certain ways! In others, the Beatles were the ones who were ahead of everyone - if you think about it.

and what is achievement really??????????.........

What if there were no such thing as a hypothetical question

if you ask me Zappa achieved much more than the Beatles and he outlasted them too!!.....I

Can't argue with the outlasting bit, but on the achivements side, Beethoven produced less than Mozart - but who was the most accomplished composer?

 don't place my stock in record sales, or popularity, or what Rolling Stone Magazine says...that stuff is superficial, trite, and trivial. Zappa was never about that stuff and I respect him alot because of it. Zappa was a TRUE musician. AND YES, I still maintain that ZAPPA was ahead of the beatles MUSCIALLY, and COMPOSITIONALLY.

That's debatable, as you do not justify your points on Zappa, merely state them, but I've made my point.

For the record I never said that I DID NOT LIKE THE BEATLES....I do like them, and I think they wrote great songs, and I do think that their music is of HIGH QUALITY......BUT...THEY AIN'T ZAPPA!!!!!!!!!!!

oh by the way........"I realy, really admire (Zappa). He's atleast trying to do something different with the form. It's incredible how he has his band as tight as a real orchestra. I'm very impressed by the kind of discipline he can bring to rock that NOBODY ELSE CAN SEEM TO BRING TO IT"..............that my friends is a quote from JOHN LENNON.....hahaha, deal with it!!

A great artist always pays respect to other great artists

And yes it is true that bands like YES were influenced by the Beatles, but Rick Wakeman is quoted as saying....."We in England were really interested in what some Americans were doing, like FRANK ZAPPA, he seemed to be ahead us in many ways"

And so do other, not quite as great artists...