Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord
Not much personal history tbh. I don't listen to VU that much for no apparent reason, but when I do I very much enjoy them, and this album. I'm not sure when I first heard it but I only came to it and proto-punk in general after joining the forum. I'm assuming it would have been within a year or two at most, so about five or six years ago I suppose. So I'm not a superfan or someone who can't listen to the album objectively.
I like the album quite a bit, but somewhat less so the second half, and while I no longer hate Nico as a dull, pretentious-sounding twat she's still not my favorite thing about the album. So it's not a flawless classic to me, but what's right about it is right as ****. I don't know about alternate tunings and whatever else are supposed to make this so experimental, but I love that it's the sound of what psychedelic rock could have sounded like in an alternate universe, and is remarkably less dated than a lot of that other stuff to boot. It's definitely garagey, but elevated by a hodgepodge of influences that meld seamlessly to create a very diverse tracklist of catchy, interesting songs that can rightfully be taken seriously but don't forget to be accessible as garage rock should be.
|
I did almost bring up the garage rock connection in my comments on the album but I wasn't sure if it would be dismissed as terrible plebbery. Basically I wondered if it was meaningful to call it garage rock just because it sounded raw. Also, is it raw on purpose or by accident? I guess I'm thinking of garage rock as being
intentionally recorded with a potato.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
it's Reed softening his vocals is all
a comment about all the "50's rock" you hear
it's because Reed's guitar playing is like everything in his ethos, to the point, no chaser, pure as snow
the appeal is that RocknRoll that straight is a gut punch, it's why he's more a godfather of punk than "old rock"
|
The simple and raw approach is probably a better fit than anything more ornate would be. I can't see Reed backed by an orchestra. I also see the Godfather of punk angle. He's got a rawness and a lack of affectation that is mirrored by early punk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
Nah. He's an amazing singer because he communicates emotion so clearly despite his awful voice. It might sound silly but I don't even think his brilliance in that regard is even subjective.
|
On this album, I didn't feel it at all, but I do remember there being parts of the Lulu album where his vocals were strikingly raw and emotionally unguarded. I'm essentially saying I liked Reed far more on Lulu. At least on the better cuts.