Why is this considered an experimental/avant-garde masterpiece again? Only Venus in Furs and Black Angel's Death Song sound remotely experimental and even there it's mostly Cale's viola that does the heavy lifting, the rest of the tracks is just 60s rock sloppa

Because both lou reed and nico sing like retards with unlistenable forced accents therefore it's deep and super revolutionary ok goy, nevermind that all songs except 1 (venus in furs) literally just sound like either the beatles or bob dylan

To annoy you

>>127287636 (OP)
It was pretty experimental for the time considering nobody had tried to make such abysmally bad music before

>>127287636 (OP)
Alternate guitar tunings or something idk

Mostly because everyone sucks at playing their instruments and sounds like shit which was a revolutionary idea in 1966. Also Run Run Run, Heroin, and European Son all feature freeform soloing and feedback which was new for rock music. Waiting for the Man has one chord on the piano for like 90% of it's runtime. Oh and All Tomorrows Partys has a drone through the whole song iirc. Idk like show me anything else in 1966 that sounds like VU. The only sloppa is Sunday Morning, Femme Fatale, I'll Be Your Mirror, and There She Goes.

>>127287636 (OP)
Because it was released in 1967, they can't sing, and their lyrics are about drugs, sex, prostitution, or other ""taboo"" shit.

>>127287636 (OP)
they were dirty beatniks making weird stuff at the a when everyone else was dirty hippies making flower power shit and CIA-funded circus music

>>127287897
>at the a
at a time*

>>127287636 (OP)
Because you weren't supposed to be able to have a tonal sequences in a verse chorus verse structure until then. They had to be le something even more avant gaurd or in uncommon time signatures. So when it came out it broke the rules of western song writing entirely. If it came out today it probably wouldn't be nearly as influential nor held as an avant gaurde super high art masterpiece but they were doing things that weren't considered possible in the context of western music widely yet. Tonality needed to be Le longer form or whatever and then wad generally trying to be avant gaurde harder in terms of resisting the sort of sing song pop structure. So a song with like a guy breaking glass bottles over a james brown beat to someone in 1968 would have been mind bending aswell. The Beatles actually seem "more" avant gaurde in retrospect or Pink Floyd because in many ways they were just chasing trends and a lot of what they did simply didn't hold water in the long run in terms of more widespread in the long run. The VU figured out you could put a pop beat or anything "catchy" by a marketing standard in the background of like the most atonal pretentious sequence possible and actually people would still find it listenable or enjoyable. They prettymuch subverting maybe 90% of previously held composional beliefs. Now if that's good or bad to you depends on what you think about art theory or whatever but if you like any punk or post punk or extreme metal or that one mid 70s rolling stones song basically a lot of that was possible because of them. They shifted general consensus on what music was and how it could should be written. So it was "avant gaurde" when it came out and now feels like roots and traditional kind of. But Lou Reed inadvertently invalidated like hundreds and hundreds of years of music study and then started telling music scholars what to think and what the new theory should be while drugged out like half nodding off on heroin barely conscious.

>>127287897
They weren't CIA Funded they were a way for Andy WRhol to further his career/promote himself prettymuch. I actually agree that Warhol was a dogshit artist despite how libtarded I am. I'm not in the alt right or whatever,but yeah no shit he was just aping random bullshit af the viewer and seeing what stuck. I don't think I exactly need to be conservative or have taken any social theory to figure that one. That being said I also think they were an incredible band. Even if the concept of taping a banana to the wall is fucking stupid dogshit. They verymuch had some incredible songs with a wide variation of mood and atmosphere and some stellar guitar work too. Way heavier and way like more psychedelic also I think even if Lou was as pretentious as Warhol was. I get why you guys hate it AS AN ARTISTIC CONCEPT. But truly avant gaurde or whatever blah blah blah or however racist nico was or how much of a slut whatever,those songs on the first album pretty fucking hard as was much of both The VUs other albums and Nicos solo career to follow. Sunday Morning and All Tomorrow's Parties have "objective" beauty to them. They feel meditative and reflective. I would say Heroin aswell. Was Lou Reed an incredible role model or whatever probably not,but he never claimed to be. He was an exception man. He was trying to prove he didn't care and alternative and shit he was like you guys complain about but he also prettymuch won without trying. His art succeed on merrit prettymuch. It was neither intended for mainstream audiences nor heavily marketed to them but is now 1000× more recognizable and widely used than bands with substantially more commercial potential. If they were really that bad songwriters Lou Reed should have been capable of alienating mainstream audiences as desperately as he wanted to. It was because of how solid the songwriting was that he basically "failed" to keep that "niche hipster appeal" you guys all complain about with them.

>>127289193
I'm lost on a lot of what you're saying such as
>Because you weren't supposed to be able to have a tonal sequences in a verse chorus verse structure until then

But I get
>you could put a pop beat or anything "catchy" by a marketing standard in the background of like the most atonal pretentious sequence possible

This is basically what Les Rallizes Denudes and a lot of post punk do where the rhythm section plays something catchy and gives the guitar free reign to play the most god awful noise and it still works and sounds good.

At least throw me a source or something to learn more because it sounds interesting but I have no musical education

Literally casual racism and singing about fucking trans girls in the 60s and people just accepted it because he was a very talented genius. If it was as bad as you guys say it would have kept it's niche or cult factor. It wouldn't have wildly crossed over to mainstream audiences without trying to decades later. Plenty of bands with 50 times the marketing and way way higher commercial aspirations are now far less remembered than The Velvet Underground. They tried as hard as possible to alienate mainstream audiences and stay Underground and involuntarily recieved mass worldwide commercial appeal despite singing about fucking trans women in the late 60s and like fucking heroin. They had zero commercial potential and still out preformed bands with infinitely higher budgets who toured more who were easier to interview etc. They are more critically accepted and better known than half the bands you guys pretend to like despite like I said zero commercial appeal and really controversial lyrical content for that time period. Also like they charted overseas after being out for several decades. You don't chart retrospectively if you were both a bad songwriter and had zero cultural impact especially when initially the entire point was to create something that would alienate mainstream audiences as much as possible. So Lou Reed did that and it was pretty "avant gaurde" for the time yet still died a millionaire with his music playing in car ads. He did everything possible to genuinely be disturbing and visceral and psychological and have as little Comercial potential as he could and still died rich famous and well respected. So clearly if they were this "hipster and contrarian" yet managed to be "too mainstream" for many of you decades later despite the band not wanting to be I think it's pretty obvious they won. If they made something as caring and alienating as "black angels death song" but are more recognizable than Cream or The Who to most people under 50 it's yk.

>>127287636 (OP)
>Why is this considered an experimental/avant-garde masterpiece again?
see that andy warhol signature below? that's why

>>127289343
There wasn't such a thing as trans "women" in the 60s. Stop lying, you Jew

>>127289193
>>127289268
>>127289343
Are you on a stimulant. I appreciate your messy but well informed writing style.

>>127289283
Yes exactly. Both Les Residules and a lot of post punk bands were inspired by The Velvet Underground. So was Nirvana and The Sonic Youth. So were Forgotten Woods the black metal band from Norway who pioneered DSBM. Some Metal Bands probably. Etc etc. Lou Reed actively hated mainstream audiences so much yet like actively outsold some one hit wonders it's really hard to try and paint him as an objectively bad musician or artist in light of that. It's yk. He also unintentionally mogged a bunch of random classical composers into oblivion while doing this.

>>127289363
I'm off work. I just got off. Smoked weed but that's it sofar. I don't really do cocaine that much like I used to either. Just smoke weed. I drink a lot too mind you.

>>127289347
Probably but like it's also pretty good musically. Andy Warhol himself was fucking dogshit I won't even lie. But that doesn't really change how great some songs on here were.

>>127289357
Not on a culturally accepted level no but yk that's what lady Godiva is about prettymuch.

>>127289268
>They weren't CIA Funded they were a way for Andy WRhol to further his career/promote himself prettymuch.
Warhol himself was CIA-funded
not that I have a problem with it, I love me some glowie-core like Zappa, The Doors, Hendrix, Can, etc

>>127287636 (OP)
I don't know why but the instrumentals sound like Art Nouveau

>>127287636 (OP)
You have to go down to the car wash and listen to it to fully understand what they were trying to do

>>127289702
At this point you're more annoying than Nicotard

>>127289810
Just trying to give OP the perfect setting to listen to this album. Why so hostile?

>>127287636 (OP)
Just put in context. It isn't difficult. You're not retarded. Stop pretending to be.