|
|
Post by rockysigman on Jan 16, 2006 20:36:12 GMT -5
I'm gonna have to go out on a limb and say that intending to make an album the worst of all time implicitly disqualifies you from making the best album of all time  Haha, of course. If an album sucks, then it can't be great. I was just trying to make a point. Smart ass. |
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Jan 16, 2006 20:37:18 GMT -5
Although I think Metal Machine Music has a legitimate claim for the greatest liner notes of all time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Jan 16, 2006 20:45:08 GMT -5
Reasons why The Velvet Underground and Nico is the Greatest Album in Rock and Roll ... It won our informal poll, which Melon finally got scored for me last week. If the good folks on this message board say its the best, that's pretty damn hard to argue with.  The songs are not just very, very good, but were literally groundbreaking. Cale's viola drones marked something that hadn't been heard in rock and roll before, and the arrangements generally pushed the envelope of what was possible for a four/five piece rock and roll band. Even today, songs like Heroin and Venus in Furs would be considered huge stretches coming from any rock band. Also, Lou's use of conventional soul and rock riffs and techniques grounded the avant-garde leanings, which gives the record a wonderful tension. The sheer range of the songs here is nothing short of mind-boggling. "Sunday Morning" is as beautiful as anything Brian Wilson or Paul McCartney cooked up in their big budget sessions for Pet Sounds or Sgt. Pepper. Waiting for the Man offers a more intense version of Dylan's amphetamine lyrics (WftM picks up where the fast tracks on Highway 61 or Bringing It All Back Home left off). There She Goes Again contrasts a soulful hook and backing vocal with the brutality and starkness of the words and Reed's deadpan delivery. There are the obvious stretches into disonance and noise (European Son, which actually rocks, and the Black Angel's Death Song), and then there's Heroin ... What can I say about a track that takes a junkie's fall into oblivion and turns it into an epic which equals or surpasses Hey Jude or Like a Rolling Stone? Heroin remains one of the most impressive achievements in rock and roll songcraft, an incredibly catchy number which will insinuate its way into your brain, and then remind you of just how harrowing the tale it tells is. This is the obvious touchstone for not just drab looks at addiction such as Alice in Chains' Dirt, but also for the rise and fall of tracks like U2's classics Bad and Running to Stand Still. In terms of breadth, there are few single LPs that can match The Velvet Underground and Nico. It challenges your expectations and perceptions of rock and roll, and quite possibly, of life in general. Even today, this is a confrontational record, one that requires (and rewards) a listener to be actively engaged with it. This ain't no background music, this is music that you have to deal with consciously, that you have to grapple with. Rock and roll is an inherently rebelious form, and this is a record which challenges virtually every assumption or preconception a listener brings to it. There is absolutely no reactionary element to The Velvet Underground and Nico, it is a record that was (and remains) a forward looking statement. This contrasts starkly with The Beatles, which resolutely quotes from Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys, as well as from other, older, musical styles. Finally, this is still the sound of four/five people making noise together. Like Who's Next (or London Calling), this record is a document of what sounds these people made at a particular place and time. There's no "studio wizardry" here, just old-fashioned sweat, blood, and emotion. The result is a record that, despite its refusal to play by rules or to harken backward to more familiar sounds, is completely and intrinsically human. Even Nico's legendary "Teutonic ice-goddess" persona and vocal showcase her voice as it was, not as a result of electronic processing or manipulation. The kind of alienation that today's harshest artists try to convey through distortion and other electronic gizmos, Nico could summon up just by opening her mouth. The result of all of this is quite simply (one of) the great rock and roll album. The countless artists who have cited this as one of their primary inspirations speaks volumes for its lasting influence. Yeah, Andy Warhol's backing certainly got a few people to hear this who wouldn't have otherwise, and allowed the band to avoid compromising their vision for studio execs, but that was about the extent of his involvement. Remember that when this was recorded in 1966 (well BEFORE Sgt. Pepper came out), about all Warhol did in the studio was start the tape machine. This is another example of a great band album, one where every member contributed througout, and the merits of the record (for better or worse) is directly attributable to those musicians. Best album ever? Hard to argue against it. (Though I will, at some point, when I write up why London Calling really is the Greatest Album in Rock and Roll). |
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Jan 16, 2006 20:48:31 GMT -5
Reasons why The Velvet Underground and Nico is the Greatest Album in Rock and Roll ... It won our informal poll, which Melon finally got scored for me last week. If the good folks on this message board say its the best, that's pretty damn hard to argue with. The songs are not just very, very good, but were literally groundbreaking. Cale's viola drones marked something that hadn't been heard in rock and roll before, and the arrangements generally pushed the envelope of what was possible for a four/five piece rock and roll band. Even today, songs like Heroin and Venus in Furs would be considered huge stretches coming from any rock band. Also, Lou's use of conventional soul and rock riffs and techniques grounded the avant-garde leanings, which gives the record a wonderful tension. The sheer range of the songs here is nothing short of mind-boggling. "Sunday Morning" is as beautiful as anything Brian Wilson or Paul McCartney cooked up in their big budget sessions for Pet Sounds or Sgt. Pepper. Waiting for the Man offers a more intense version of Dylan's amphetamine lyrics (WftM picks up where the fast tracks on Highway 61 or Bringing It All Back Home left off). There She Goes Again contrasts a soulful hook and backing vocal with the brutality and starkness of the words and Reed's deadpan delivery. There are the obvious stretches into disonance and noise (European Son, which actually rocks, and the Black Angel's Death Song), and then there's Heroin ... What can I say about a track that takes a junkie's fall into oblivion and turns it into an epic which equals or surpasses Hey Jude or Like a Rolling Stone? Heroin remains one of the most impressive achievements in rock and roll songcraft, an incredibly catchy number which will insinuate its way into your brain, and then remind you of just how harrowing the tale it tells is. This is the obvious touchstone for not just drab looks at addiction such as Alice in Chains' Dirt, but also for the rise and fall of tracks like U2's classics Bad and Running to Stand Still. In terms of breadth, there are few single LPs that can match The Velvet Underground and Nico. It challenges your expectations and perceptions of rock and roll, and quite possibly, of life in general. Even today, this is a confrontational record, one that requires (and rewards) a listener to be actively engaged with it. This ain't no background music, this is music that you have to deal with consciously, that you have to grapple with. Rock and roll is an inherently rebelious form, and this is a record which challenges virtually every assumption or preconception a listener brings to it. There is absolutely no reactionary element to The Velvet Underground and Nico, it is a record that was (and remains) a forward looking statement. This contrasts starkly with The Beatles, which resolutely quotes from Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys, as well as from other, older, musical styles. Finally, this is still the sound of four/five people making noise together. Like Who's Next (or London Calling), this record is a document of what sounds these people made at a particular place and time. There's no "studio wizardry" here, just old-fashioned sweat, blood, and emotion. The result is a record that, despite its refusal to play by rules or to harken backward to more familiar sounds, is completely and intrinsically human. Even Nico's legendary "Teutonic ice-goddess" persona and vocal showcase her voice as it was, not as a result of electronic processing or manipulation. The kind of alienation that today's harshest artists try to convey through distortion and other electronic gizmos, Nico could summon up just by opening her mouth. The result of all of this is quite simply (one of) the great rock and roll album. The countless artists who have cited this as one of their primary inspirations speaks volumes for its lasting influence. Yeah, Andy Warhol's backing certainly got a few people to hear this who wouldn't have otherwise, and allowed the band to avoid compromising their vision for studio execs, but that was about the extent of his involvement. Remember that when this was recorded in 1966 (well BEFORE Sgt. Pepper came out), about all Warhol did in the studio was start the tape machine. This is another example of a great band album, one where every member contributed througout, and the merits of the record (for better or worse) is directly attributable to those musicians. Best album ever? Hard to argue against it. (Though I will, at some point, when I write up why London Calling really is the Greatest Album in Rock and Roll). What Ken said. |
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Jan 16, 2006 20:49:50 GMT -5
I especially like this... The songs are not just very, very good, but were literally groundbreaking. Cale's viola drones marked something that hadn't been heard in rock and roll before, and the arrangements generally pushed the envelope of what was possible for a four/five piece rock and roll band. Even today, songs like Heroin and Venus in Furs would be considered huge stretches coming from any rock band. Also, Lou's use of conventional soul and rock riffs and techniques grounded the avant-garde leanings, which gives the record a wonderful tension. And this... It challenges your expectations and perceptions of rock and roll, and quite possibly, of life in general. Even today, this is a confrontational record, one that requires (and rewards) a listener to be actively engaged with it. This ain't no background music, this is music that you have to deal with consciously, that you have to grapple with. Rock and roll is an inherently rebelious form, and this is a record which challenges virtually every assumption or preconception a listener brings to it. There is absolutely no reactionary element to The Velvet Underground and Nico, it is a record that was (and remains) a forward looking statement. This contrasts starkly with The Beatles, which resolutely quotes from Chuck Berry and the Beach Boys, as well as from other, older, musical styles. |
|
|
|
Post by shin on Jan 16, 2006 20:53:30 GMT -5
Zzzzzzz
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Jan 16, 2006 20:54:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by shin on Jan 16, 2006 20:55:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by riley on Jan 16, 2006 21:03:02 GMT -5
is it possible the greatest album could have been released after 1980? without making a claim as to what it might be, does it seem typical to jump into the vault rather than exploring the possibility that maybe the originators have been surpassed somewhere along the way by somethign more recent? we just always seem to jump right to the 60's. why is that?
just curious before I jump in the less popular over done angle.
|
|
|
|
Post by shin on Jan 16, 2006 21:05:02 GMT -5
is it possible the greatest album could have been released after 1980? without making a claim as to what it might be, does it seem typical to jump into the vault rather than exploring the possibility that maybe the originators have been surpassed somewhere along the way? just curious before I nominate Rush. |
|
|
|
Post by riley on Jan 16, 2006 21:07:40 GMT -5
is it possible the greatest album could have been released after 1980? without making a claim as to what it might be, does it seem typical to jump into the vault rather than exploring the possibility that maybe the originators have been surpassed somewhere along the way? just curious before I nominate Rush. there's an understanding in the communicating modern world that Rush are the greatest performing artists of all time. debates like this one, embrace that norm and search for answers beyond that understanding. the other "greatest" if you will. everyone accepts this. |
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Jan 16, 2006 21:08:35 GMT -5
is it possible the greatest album could have been released after 1980? without making a claim as to what it might be, does it seem typical to jump into the vault rather than exploring the possibility that maybe the originators have been surpassed somewhere along the way by somethign more recent? we just always seem to jump right to the 60's. why is that? just curious before I jump in the less popular over done angle. No real reason, other than the fact that it's difficult to know the long term impact of newer albums, so if impact is an important criteria, its tough to make a case for newer albums. That being said, 1980 is certainly long enough ago to know the impact of albums made around that time. So no, no particular reason for anything from 1980 to maybe some time in the late '90s or so not to be mentioned, other than the fact that there aren't any albums from that period that anyone who has chimed in on the subject so far has deemed worthy to mention. |
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Jan 16, 2006 21:08:54 GMT -5
None of the albums yet mentioned is as good as OK Computer.
Except for the fact that I mentioned OK Computer earlier. That album, OK Computer, is as good as OK Computer is.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Jan 16, 2006 21:11:38 GMT -5
None of the albums yet mentioned is as good as OK Computer. Except for the fact that I mentioned OK Computer earlier. That album, OK Computer, is as good as OK Computer is. Good point. |
|
|
|
Post by riley on Jan 16, 2006 21:17:17 GMT -5
None of the albums yet mentioned is as good as OK Computer. Except for the fact that I mentioned OK Computer earlier. That album, OK Computer, is as good as OK Computer is. This album for instance is every bit as challenging to the listener if not more so than some of the albums forty years old that are still deemed to be impacting. Initial impact? Absolutely. Continued impact to a certain extent. This album, for instance, comes well after all the standard genres Ken mentioned have been supposedly established by the likes of VU, yet flies in the face of every one of them. What album does Ok Compuetr sound like? I can't think of one. Modern music through the years by nature will build on the creations of the originators. My point, as assisted by my friend kmc, is in some cases it stops building on the past and blows it all out of the water. |
|
