Why is it regarded so highly?

Why is it regarded so highly?
I mean its ok, pretty much textbook 3/5

Shut up

it pains me that people with opinions like this exist

nice bait

>pretty much textbook
Textbook to what?

It will take a long time, and not by listening to the velvet underground but by listening to every band after you will realize they were pretty much the most important band

>pretty much textbook
yeah, because it defined the textbook you ass

although this it some hefty bait, i agree it is over hyped by teenagers that don't really know much about music tagging onto anything just cool enough to cite without needing much opinion.

/thread

Only on Sup Forums would a honest question be dismissed as "LE FISH MEME XDD"

Gotta somewhat agree with OP here. The album's innovations and influence are great and enormous, but some of the tracks fall short in terms of how well they are made. The first two tracks are neither innovative nor are that creative as pop songs from that time. Not to mention that European Son is mostly awful because the lack of changes and variation in improv don't justify the long improv time. These three tracks take about a third of the album's play time.

Also this place is mad hypocritical cuz it'll call out the Beatles songwriting gaffs on their influential albums but will never do the same to TVU.

If it's textbook (which it isn't), it's because everyone copied it.

...

It wrote the textbook

Correction.

It is the textbook, plebiana

nico's voice makes me want to commit many small yet inconvenient crimes, such as leaving out legos for passerby to step on

you're a fucking monster

I mean yeah, but you don't usually credit the father of a great Olympian for the achievements of his son.

I enjoy the album and all, but I don't understand why you must include the fact that it was "influential", especially if you want to make an objective rating (or as objective as possible because music is subjective)

The album is fine but compared to everything else that had the stepping stones of this album already there, there has definitely been some progress.

what why

>le born in the RIGHT generation xD

>Legos for passerby to step on
>you monster

Wait am I on Reddit right now

but most of this board genuinely loves the beatles

and i think it's well established that TVU weren't the most brilliant songwriters

SHE'S SUCKIN ON MY DING DONG

yeah upboated


edit: my first gold :^) thank kind straner

Seems there's no one here to refute what I said then.

as someone who doesnt give a shit about influence and "who did it first", this is my favorite album of all time

what's the point of asking a question if all you're gonna do is just ignore everyone answering it in a way that doesn't line up with your pre-decided views

>Why is it regarded so highly?
because people don't have the same opinion as you

I didn't get a single reply?

The only one I got was memeing

I'm not OP if that's what you were assuming though, I just kind of agree and expounded on why I thought that was the case

Can you give me your reasoning? I'm glad to have a discussion about it

damn..

Well, besides it being influential as heck (and yes that does count for something), the songwriting is a lot more honest and provocative than the vast majority of the music coming out in that period of time, especially when record companies seemed to only be comfortable with more conservative lyricism. Besides that, the instrumentation was very well done, and the grooves they used as the backbone for a lot of their songs became the inspiration of a lot of blues rock for years to come.
It's a good example of ambitious artists setting the bar crazy high, similar to the way Loveless did, except with a much less niche genre.

/thread

this

The only thing I dislike about this album is Lou Reed's gay voice

>Textbook score
What does this even mean?

>what a clon.jpg
my sides

I can respect that you count influential in the quality, but my slight autism wants everything uniform to where if someone asked me what music sounds better without context, I would want to keep that kind of thing out.

I mostly agree though, it's actually not bad, not even average, it's pretty good, especially relative to everything else released up until this point. My point is pretty much "Its been done better" but that's hardly an argument if you want to discuss music past the raw rating you give it.

I fucking wish those viola drones were textbook. Venus In Furs, Heroin, and Black Angel's Death Song are all GOAT.

It's so simple, yet so good.

This album is essential atheist-core. Other than that it's pretty bland.

im a qt grill btw ;))

you're an ignorant egotist, AND you have shit taste.

I mean its just lou reed doing a gay voice

kek

also nice double dubs

requesting the edited album cover of this

/r/ing this as well

>The first two tracks are neither innovative nor are that creative as pop songs from that time.
the droning guitars in sunday morning, the dreamy singing with all that echo everywhere, its lush and dreamy before dream pop was even a concept

Im waiting for the man has the repetitive drums and guitar minimalism that you can easily take for granted today, but no one had done it before

Damn...

It's not just that they inspired artists, they wrote the rules that punk and garage bands have followed since. You have to give credit to the ones who did it first, because it's not as if any other band would have done it eventually.

But that's just looking at how new it was, the album is celebrated for more than that, the dreaminess of it, the explicit lyrics, the atmosphere created from the gorgeous arrangements, true art songs like heroin that try and push music further, e.t.c

the sincerity of it stops me caring if it's been done better.
Like frank zappa invented the whole xylophone guitar prog sound we associate with avant-prog bands from the late 70s, but he did it because thats just music he wanted to make, he wasn't copying anything. Avant-prog bands might have made better songs with those aesthetics, but they didn't have any reasoning behind it, they just wanted to sound like an avant-prog band

people use simple drumming and talk about drugs all the time, and they might make better songs, but i don't believe in it as much

>the songwriting is a lot edgier than the vast majority of the music coming out in that period of time

ftfy

except that son would've grown up as a fucking nobody with no skills in hand if it weren't for his parenting.

this would be funny if I was 14 and on r/gaming

wrong album you fool

edit 2: inbox flew up ha
edit 3: rip inbox

>droning guitars in Sunday morning
they barely drone on that track wtf are you talking about?

>dreamy sing
>Beach Boys and psych pop didn't exist before TVU

>repetitive drums and minimal guitar
>rock n roll didn't exist before TVU

Can't disagree with that
Just not my preference to include that
I mean yeah, but the Olympian gets the medal, not the father

Fucking pleb nico is better than reed on this thing

ok, now what does that mean

TOO BUSY SUCKIN ON MY DING DONG

Influential