For Your Entertainment

ZZ Top - entertaining through the medium of music.

Ever fan of music has there favorite genres, favorite styles, favorite instruments, favorite musicians. Consciously, or subconsciously, the musician or performer's attitude and presentation influences the listeners interpretation of the sounds and lyrics. Celine Dion singing Zeppelin's "In My Time of Dying" is not going to come across in any shape or form as well as Plant's rendition. The listener is not going to "feel" the swagger, the ego, the pomp and circumstance of Zeppelin's lofty heights in the mid '70's. I suppose the listener would not "feel" the sincerity and passion if Plant covered a Dion tune. No matter, not my tastes, but some people dig it.

This sets up the question: Has ZZ over applied the attitude and presentation to the detriment of the sounds and lyrics. Certainly "El Loco" was the last album to feature the majority of songs containing meaningful lyrics, "Pearl Necklace" and "Heaven, Hell or Houston" notwithstanding. Most of the albums since have been very simplistic in their lyrical approach, even if the song isn't full of double entades. There is a stark contrast between the musical and lyrical approach of the band's songs in the 1970's and the post "El Loco" period. Maybe perhaps the band didn't approach songwriting differently, the results were just different.

My argument is that live the band has gone over the top with regard to "entertaining" and has as a consequence lost the feel for the music. There has been limited variation in the band's set list since 1997, wherein a few tracks from the current or most recent album are played but the core songs are hammered on year after year. "Cheap Sunglasses", "Nationwide", "Got Me Under Pressure", the Eliminator trilogy, "La Grange", "Tush", "Pincushion", Bus / Chicago, "Tube Snake Boogie". I mean come on, do you have to end with Tush EVERY NIGHT. The Top, like every good band, feeds off the energy of the audience. An the argument can be made that these songs result in the most enthusiastic response. But go back to 1977. The band played every song from "Tejas" save for "Asleep In the Desert" during the tour, often featuring seven or eight of the songs a night. They would bring out the rare, obscure number, like "Neighbor Neighbor", a song that wasn't a hit per se and was a blip on ZZ's first album. The confidence in the music and the desire and excitement in playing the new songs is infectious, and shows a band at the top of their musical chops and ability (in a live forum).

I believe the lack of a new album in six years is a direct result of this overemphasis on "entertaining". Why waste time in the studio when you can perform for the masses? Of course, this whole topic is mitigated and tempered by the fact the band has been together for 40 years. They don't need to prove a thing, and the wealth of music they have given fans over the past four decades is a fantastic gift. Many bands burn out overnight, petty in their disagreements and financial discontent. ZZ doesn't have that problem. They have proven to be shining examples of longevity. But perhaps a change of focus is needed in order to keep things from getting stale. Perhaps a renewed focus on the music. Perhaps a new album.