MicShazam

Allright, here we go. I do not want to hear any butthurt complaints about how I "just don't get it". I agreed to give the whole damn thing a spin, even though I already told you all that it's probably not going to be my thing.
So what are you going to say? That I failed to appreciate it? No ****!
That's what was obviously in the cards to begin with, so... Just saying.

Anyway, while I was listening through this album, I took a bunch of notes.

The original idea was to write it up into a full piece, but that would take a lot of time and my notes are fairly cohesive and readable, so I'll be a lazy ******* and just post my notes for each song, and then I'll write some closing thoughts.

PS: There's some weird word-wrapping because I wrote most of this in a tiny TXT window. That's why the notes below look like poorly formatted poems.

Sunday Morning
French pop. Françoise Hardy.
Weak vocals. Nico seemed stronger on her debut album.
Just sort of ends.
I'm Waiting for the Man
Lou Reed doing his thing. Repetitive.
Feels like 50's rock through a late 60's filter.
Honestly really bad. The distorted rhythm guitars
sounds like crap.
Femme Fatale
Nico again. So far it feels like we're simply
ping-ponging between a nico album and a VU album.
Her vocals are pretty ****ing weak here.
Takes on a sort of 50's pop group feel with those
harmonized background vocals. You can really hear
how poorly recorded the music is here. Audible
distortion of microphones.
Venus in Furs
Raga drones. Lou Reed again. His vocal inflections
do not appeal to me at all. He's just a crap singer,
although what he's doing probably should be measured
by a different standard. The chorus sounds like
bad karaoke. I just realize how much Reed sometimes
reminds me of Danish singer Kim Larsen - who I also
do not like at all. The violin later gets a bit
more interesting, but overall, I find this pretty
dull to sit through. If isolated, there's a few
seconds of honestly really good violin here.
Run Run Run
More with one leg placed in the 50's. Partially
bluesy vocals, but overall quite rock'n'roll in
style, musically speaking. This places itself quite
firmly in "rock music I do not care for" territory.
I know rock music like this isn't supposed to be
all that intricate, but this really did end up
feeling like a pretty half-assed arrangement.
Especially that solo late in the song. I said I
would be honest so... This song is crap,
essentially.
All Tomorrow's Parties
Immediately I'm thinking the Doors. Then I'm
noticing the horrible recording quality. Is this a
bad Youtube upload? I think it might actually be so.
Nico's vocals... I don't know... her accent is
strikingly unflattering. "Aaaahhhll tomaarrohws
paadiiiz". This is the third song to drone on pretty
repetitively like this. The harmony first in the
verse works well, so that's something.
Dull, aimless lead guitar playing.
Heroin
I ****ing hate Lou Reed as a singer/vocalist. I'd gladly
read a poetry book written by the man, but his vocal
approach does about as much for me as that of Fred Durst.
He has this really annoying tick of ending his lines in this
weird, drawn out way that sounds nothing like speech.
Someone like Leonard Cohen or Suzanne Vega does this sort of
half-talking/half-singing vocal much, much better.
Droning violins again. Simple, looping guitar arrangement.
This song is a bit long. JUST SAYING.
The best part was where they raped the violin. I just realize
how close this is to some parts of Lulu (an album which I actually
listened to all the way through at least three times).
There She Goes Again
More 50's feeling rock with harmonized backing vocals. Puh-leez.
Nothing to say here. It's bog standard template music.
I'll Be Your Mirror
It's quieter, so Nico time again, I guess? Yes... There we go.
Not into her vocal style. She's like a French pop singer without
the charm. Something like a big chorus starts happening, but we
quickly fade out over it. Huh... Well, that was that song.
The Black Angel's Death Song
Bit more interesting sounding music here, but of course it's
repetitive enough that all impact is lost after a while.
So many flashbacks to Lulu, seriously. I guess this is Lou Reed
territory then, stylistically speaking. Lou Reed's vocals... there's some vague
attempt at staying on the flow and tempo of the song, but
it sounds pretty clumsy in practise.
Is he just making **** up near the end of this song?
Probably.
European Son
50's rock'n'roll. First time I'm noticing a bass guitar.
Groaning metal! Smashed glass! Sudden guitar in the left
speaker that is curiously much louder mixed than the other
instruments. Intentional or not, my overall impression thus
far has frankly been that of a very poorly mastered record.
Amplifier feedback, rumbling, distorted bass. I'm surprised
they waited this long to go full Sonic Youth. Quite a long
song, but at least there's something actually going on.
Quite a few changes in texture and instrumentation so far.
Still two whole minutes to go and this is starting to get
just a LITTLE old. Nothing can convince me there's much
thought behind this arrangement. It's fine though. I just
don't think it sounds neither good, nor interesting.

In summation:
I sat through the entire album with no skipping ahead. I gave it my undivided attention. That's about all you can ask of me.
I'd say that yes, the album is in fact somewhat varied. I'd argue it leaned on 50's rock of varying stripes more than anything, but there were nods to blues, some outright French-style pop balladry, some folk and/or folk-rock, some drones, plus a bit of Sonic Youth esque noise and a hint of modern classical violin if you count the backing track to a couple otherwise straight forward songs.

I still feel like the vast majority of the album was pretty firmly within what I would have expected to hear. In that sense it wasn't really worth the try. I didn't expect to like it, and I don't like it. I'm not going to say I told you so (but I did).

I'm aware that it might seem like I'm trashing this album in bad faith, but it really just is a question of the sensibilites behind this album project being a pretty huge mismatch with my personal preferences.

I'd even say that the stylistic aspects of the album that placed themselves the closest to thing I appreciate are pretty heavily outgunned by various other artists.
The Nico led ballads? I'd rather listen to Françoise Hardy or Jane Birkin. The folk numbers? Give me Vashti Bunyan or any number of 60's folk-rock bands that I've just begun looking into recently. The band "Trees", for example.Talk-singing about people and places? Give me Vega or Cohen or Dylan. Raw, abrasive rock music? PJ Harvey.

Note that I have a certain approach to music when it comes to really any album, including influential, important albums. I try my best to listen to an album outside of it's original context. This is opposite of what many would say one should do. In my view, all music should be appreciated for what it is. At face value. All equal with past accomplishments and accolades erased. Essentially, I listened to this album as if it came out yesterday.
Seen that way, it's hard for me to take it as anything other than a poorly produced, limply performed and pretty dull - if somewhat ecclectic - album of lo-fi rock. Unique? As far as I can see, yes, quite possibly, but that's when taken as a whole. Every individual song struck me as very, very familiar in terms of musical style.

Further thoughts:
I do wonder what this album means to you people on here who will disagree with me the most. When did you listen to it first? You personal history with it, what is so great about it, what it gives you that is yet unmatched by other artists. I'm especially interested in hearing this from Frownland, The Batlord and also you, Elphenor.

A stray thought that hit me, given how Frownland was the main advocate for the album here, is how clearly my musical sensibilites and his musical sensibilities are expressed through the ****ty music we write. You barely need words to explain how different our respective outlooks on music is. You can hear it clear as day.

Questions:
Am I the only who thinks the album sounds really poorly recorded/mastered, or am I just the only one who cares?
Am I the only one who thinks Nico is really slumming it here? I've heard her debut album. She was better there.

Frownland

It's understated and in your face at the same time.

It's experimentation is wild and unmatched for the time.

I can't think if another album that sounds like it.

The production is fine.

Lou Reed is a terrible singer but he's more effective than the majority of other singers.

The drone elements and percussion pulled from Theatre of Eternal Music.

It sounds 0% like Lulu.

The soft moments are very beautiful.

The harder moments are raw as **** and have explosive energy.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

MicShazam

Just checking it again and... yes, although it's a very bright voice on Sunday Morning, it clearly isn't Nico. I did sit and mess around with multiple things when I started this, so I misheard that pretty badly. It actually sounds like Lou Reed doing a different voice. Do they have a third singer?

rubber soul

To add to Elph's comments, the VU didn't particularly like Nico. Yes, she was pushed on them by Warhol and I'm sure she was relieved when they parted ways. She did make a nice album at the end of 1967.

I actually bought a copy of the album at the Salvation Army of all places with the banana peel still intact (of course dummy me peeled the banana off like an idiot). I think what makes the album so special is the contrast of the musical styles compared to the happier psychedelia of the period. While much of the music on the radio wanted you to get high and love life, VU was coming from a dark place with songs about pushers and needles. Maybe that's why it took years for people to really get into them.

Maybe some of it has to do with the later success Lou Reed had with his solo career. I don't think he was ever as good as he was with VU though. After Transformer and, with the exception of a couple of songs, he really doesn't do a lot for me.

But I think there was something special with Reed, Sterling Morrison, John Cale, and Maureen Tucker. Nico, admittedly, was more or less along for the ride, but I don't think she takes anything away from the album at all.

__________________

MicShazam

This goes back to what I said about how our musical sensibilities differ quite strikingly. Essentially, **** no

In didn't mean it as a negative comparison though. It's fine if you disagree, but I really do find that some of the way some shrill, atonal guitar/violin noises relate to a certain Lou Reed vocal approach reminds me very much of some of what Hammett contributed to Lulu. It's what I'm hearing, anyway and I'm only talking about certain moments, certain nuances.

This is interesting. Maybe that's why her vocals (at least to me) seem weaker than usual. If she didn't even feel welcome there.

I do respect what the record and the band has done in terms of their place in musical history and their place in the continuum of influence on future artists, but like I said, I insist on listening to music as if it was released yesterday. Basically, historical importance is fine and all, but what is this album in 2017?

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.

__________________

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. Virtuosity doesn't count for everything.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

MicShazam

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.

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.

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.

The Batlord

Not many singers who make me picture the way their mouth moves when they sing quite as vividly as Lou Reed. No wonder he was a famous *******. No way someone with this much effortless attitude could be "one of the guys".

__________________

Frownland

I like the tone and texture of his voice a lot more on Lulu since he's aged and it's gotten raspy, but his vox on the VU cut deep.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.