Sneelock
god
hey Daddy-O. I don't wanna go.
Posts: 8,509
|
Post by Sneelock on Sept 22, 2020 22:50:34 GMT
the great thing about this thread is that, on some level, it makes sense.
for a few years now nearly as many (if not more) Americans identify Halloween as their favorite Holiday rather than Christmas.
I know more than a few empty headed young people and the dark underbelly of things is WAY more appealing to them than primary colors & stuff.
ebb and flow.
as I say, I've been listening to VU and Lou a lot for a couple of weeks and even though I'm a doddering oldster, a lot of it sounds mighty contemporary in a lot of ways.
they deserve to be pitted against the Fab Four from Liverpool who blablabla
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 22:53:54 GMT
I will say that if you picked the best of The Velvets and pitched it against the best of The Beatles it becomes a closer call. But part of the wonder of The Beatles is they did so much and travelled so far.
|
|
Sneelock
god
hey Daddy-O. I don't wanna go.
Posts: 8,509
|
Post by Sneelock on Sept 22, 2020 23:01:12 GMT
From "I want to Hold your Hand" to "Why Don't we Do It in the Road" they affected and reflected the turbulent times. they seemed innocent when they were far from it and threatening to the right people for the right reasons.
Paul was right. if he'd said "I love LSD" then teenyboppers all over the world would have gobbled it up. Lennon's phone was bugged for a reason.
I'm not sure if they were trendsetters or victims but the Zeitgeist is the Fickle Finger of Fate. It pointed at them and they pointed back.
they probably would have lived happier lives if it hadn't but who's to say?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2020 23:04:20 GMT
I would say the Velvets did more and travelled further on their first album. Sunday Morning to European son ( all killer- no filler)
|
|
Sneelock
god
hey Daddy-O. I don't wanna go.
Posts: 8,509
|
Post by Sneelock on Sept 22, 2020 23:04:54 GMT
I know VU fans hate the comparison but I think VU is more like the Mothers but on the other coast. it was made for a specific sub-set of people. that sub-set has slowly mutated to something very significant (well, for VU - not the Mothers.)
the old saw about people buying the album and starting a band - there's a lot to that.
|
|
|
Post by Crunchy Col on Sept 22, 2020 23:07:35 GMT
I will say that if you picked the best of The Velvets and pitched it against the best of The Beatles it becomes a closer call. But part of the wonder of The Beatles is they did so much and travelled so far. I think the Velvets also 'travelled far'. It's almost impossible to argue against the idea that the Beatles are the greatest group of all time because on message boards like this it's an absolutely entrenched view. And it's probably a fair one too. All I've got is this: I don't really care for McCartney's songs very much (thank fuck San Juan isn't knocking around these days!). This wasn't always my view. I love Ram and a fair few of his Fabs' songs, and I'll admit he had a rare knack for melody. But these days, whenever those big doe eyes are too upfront, I step back. 'I've Just Seen A Face', 'Here There and Everywhere', 'I Will', 'Michelle' - they make me puke. I'd take 'Pale Blue Eyes' over any of them. But that's not enough of an argument for you lot, I know.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Sept 22, 2020 23:09:23 GMT
I DO think it is something akin to a ridiculous question. But the Velvets are probably in the neighborhood of my 20th favorite band (which isn’t an insult).
Ultimately they were a niche item. Great in their way, but such a narrow range.
The Beatles made music that felt like it could go anywhere. The journey from Please Please Me to Abbey Road is as thrilling as it is because it covers SO MUCH ground. They had songs for screaming pre-teen girls, weedy hipster guys, parents, old people, children, intellectuals, normies... everyone. And all without much whiff of pandering and compromise.
The visual tableau of the Yellow Submarine film captures their zeitgeist perfectly - its just brimming with imagination, color, warmth and possibilities. You could never represent the Underground that way. It wouldn’t make sense.
|
|
|
Post by Crunchy Col on Sept 22, 2020 23:11:59 GMT
I DO think it is something akin to a ridiculous question. But the Velvets are probably in the neighborhood of my 20th favorite band (which isn’t an insult). Ultimately they were a niche item. Great in their way, but such a narrow range.The Beatles made music that felt like it could go anywhere. The journey from Please Please Me to Abbey Road is as thrilling as it is because it covers SO MUCH ground. They had songs for screaming pre-teen girls, weedy hipster guys, parents, old people, children, intellectuals, normies... everyone. And all without much whiff of pandering and compromise. The visual tableau of the Yellow Submarine film captures their zeitgeist perfectly - its just brimming with imagination, color, warmth and possibilities. You could never represent the Underground that way. It wouldn’t make sense. Good post, but the bit I've highlighted is incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Sept 22, 2020 23:37:32 GMT
I DO think it is something akin to a ridiculous question. But the Velvets are probably in the neighborhood of my 20th favorite band (which isn’t an insult). Ultimately they were a niche item. Great in their way, but such a narrow range.The Beatles made music that felt like it could go anywhere. The journey from Please Please Me to Abbey Road is as thrilling as it is because it covers SO MUCH ground. They had songs for screaming pre-teen girls, weedy hipster guys, parents, old people, children, intellectuals, normies... everyone. And all without much whiff of pandering and compromise. The visual tableau of the Yellow Submarine film captures their zeitgeist perfectly - its just brimming with imagination, color, warmth and possibilities. You could never represent the Underground that way. It wouldn’t make sense. Good post, but the bit I've highlighted is incorrect. Okay - I’m open to the idea. But flesh it out. When you brought it up above, you spun off into your feelings on McCartney. But let’s talk about the Velvet’s gestalt. My sense of it is that most of their music feels like the perspective of one person. There was a bit in the liner notes of a compilation that talked about how often Reed used the phrase “alright” to mean something exalted. It was a good observation - but it also speaks to how utterly locked-in they were to that guy’s persona. They were distinctly urban and world-weary. Beautifully so - and there’s nothing WRONG with representing a more narrow slice of the universe in a very rich way (which they certainly did). But I think it accounts for the discrepancy. If the Velvets hit the bullseye for you, it will probably hit harder than The Beatles because it is SO deep and specific. But the Beatles hit exactly or pretty close to the bullseye for almost everyone. So I don’t think the conventional wisdom is going to flip anytime soon.
|
|
|
Post by Crunchy Col on Sept 22, 2020 23:49:56 GMT
Again, I agree. Mostly. But (and this so often happens when we talk about music, ironically) you're not really addressing the sounds. Talk of 'urban' attitudes, worldviews, personas, gestalt (!) - it makes for a more interesting post than 'just' saying 'this album is heavier than this one'. But it doesn't say much about what you're hearing!
So if we go back to this idea of diversity within the music, I'd say what the Velvets achieved across those four albums was astonishingly wide-ranging. Especially impressive, if (as you said) it was mostly one man's vision. The stylistic change between albums 2 and 3 is as great as anything I know of in rock music.
Yes, the Beatles appealed to everyone. Or, rather, everyone can find something within the Beatles catalogue for them. That's an achievement that the Velvets cannot match. But - so what?
|
|
toomanyhatz
god
I've met him/her. He/she's great!!
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by toomanyhatz on Sept 22, 2020 23:58:32 GMT
There is a distinct kind of music fan - Bowie captures a lot of them too - that simply does not want music that's universal/for everyone. They consider it a negative. They want something that speaks directly to them, or at least "seems to".
I would argue that the Beatles have plenty of stuff like that too, and that if they weren't so diverse or universal that it'd be easier to hear them that way, but the Velvets do have that to a greater degree. Maybe more than any other band in history.
|
|
toomanyhatz
god
I've met him/her. He/she's great!!
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by toomanyhatz on Sept 23, 2020 1:03:08 GMT
Sorry, didn't mean to kill the thread! (*slinks back to BCB*)
|
|
|
Post by Charlie O. on Sept 23, 2020 1:18:29 GMT
Sorry, didn't mean to kill the thread! (*slinks back to BCB*) It's just that time of the night. It's rare that ANYthing's going on here this late!
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Sept 23, 2020 1:36:36 GMT
Again, I agree. Mostly. But (and this so often happens when we talk about music, ironically) you're not really addressing the sounds. Talk of 'urban' attitudes, worldviews, personas, gestalt (!) - it makes for a more interesting post than 'just' saying 'this album is heavier than this one'. But it doesn't say much about what you're hearing! So if we go back to this idea of diversity within the music, I'd say what the Velvets achieved across those four albums was astonishingly wide-ranging. Especially impressive, if (as you said) it was mostly one man's vision. The stylistic change between albums 2 and 3 is as great as anything I know of in rock music. Yes, the Beatles appealed to everyone. Or, rather, everyone can find something within the Beatles catalogue for them. That's an achievement that the Velvets cannot match. But - so what? I mean - it is harder to describe sounds. But I think the Velvets operated within a more narrow palate there too. Most of what they did was delivered with a kind of lo-fi, understated guitar combo feel. A lot of it almost feels like demos. Sometimes they would amp it up a bit more, or add art-rock textures via a viola or something. It’s all pretty marvelous, but there just isn’t a huge range of sounds. Not like the Grand Canyon standing between She Loves You and I Am the Walrus.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie O. on Sept 23, 2020 2:45:59 GMT
Not like the Grand Canyon standing between She Loves You and I Am the Walrus. A grand canyon that they themselves created - it's hard to realistically imagine that anyone else would've if they hadn't. And it isn't just that they did such a wide breadth of things (and so well), but that they pulled virtually the entire music world in their wake, and inspired other artists to try to be as creative and inventive in their own ways. Maybe the Velvets' music doesn't reference the Beatles - maybe Lou always claimed not to like them, even - but would they have ever gotten a record deal without them blowing down all those doors in advance? Even if the Velvets were the ANTI-Beatles, as some might like to think... well, you can't be that without the Beatles, can you?
|
|