Quote:
Originally Posted by Necromancer
I don't see Velvet Underground as "anything", if it weren't for Andy Warhol.
|
I agree (as does Lou Reed). He fed them, gave them shelter, and helped finance the making of their debut album.
Quote:
|
VU was just a pet project created by Andy Warhol.
|
Wrong... Warhol had nothing to do with the creation of VU other than including Nico in their lineup. What happened was was that he discovered them in 1965 at Cafe Bizarre and became interested in what they were doing... So, he took them in...
Quote:
|
Warhol is the main character in this bands discography
|
Explain please...
Quote:
|
His influence on the music (itself) on the other hand can be/seem very controversial at times, to say the least.
|
He had absolutely no influence on their music. All he did was give them complete artistic freedom. If the record company wanted to change something, he wouldn't let them. That's it... (there's no controversy).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Necromancer
I personally think that they (VU) sounded awful, and are "way" overrated.
|
I understand... I thought they were absolute s
hit originally, but I eventually warmed up to their music... and now I'm an avid fan. And yea... they are overrated to some extent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Necromancer
I don't see the musical influence and contribution that they've (supposedly) made.
|
Think about it this way... without the Velvet Underground, there would be no indie/alternative rock. They were also one of the pioneers in art rock, experimental rock, and noise rock.