What's the appeal of this? I ask this as a person with Merzbow's Hyrid Noisebloom and Prurient's History of AIDS (entry level shit I know) as some of my favorite albums of all time. Why do people like this?
he was high asfuck when he made this album hahahahaha
>>63305655
It's a dadaist joke. Don't look for meaning, you'll find none. Lou was either coked out of his head for this, or he just did it to get out of a record contract, or both.
>>63305655
Scaruffi told em to like it
This was actually my first noise record and it got me into the genre. Now I'm can proudly say I'm a noise person myself. I love Merzbow, Prurient, ... The list goes on xD
>>63305655
It was completely out of left field for someone like Lou Reed to do, and it was groundbreaking at the time.
It was almost universally hated, which shows how little critics and fans actually know about music when they're faced with something that is completely new to them.
Its literally just guitar feedback for an hour, Lou Reed only did it because his record company was forcing him to release an album. Its not meant to be taken seriously and anyone who claims to like it is legitimately autistic
>>63306677
>Its not meant to be taken seriously and anyone who claims to like it is legitimately autistic
I don't understand how people can say this considering how extremely influential it was.
>>63306893
Lurk more, you'll see statements like this all the time.
>>63306677
Think of it more so as art than as music, anyone could have made this album, but with Reed's name on it a lot of people heard it who otherwise wouldn't. Some of us enjoy really abrasive art and for its time there wasn't much like it
>>63307098
There were no artistic intentions behind it you pretentious faggot
I don't like noise but I don't go around saying its "not music" however calling Metal Machine Music 'art' is just on another level of autism
>>63307098
I never said it wasn't music you dolt. I said to think of it more so as art than music. Stop trying to pick fights on a Japanese image board, you look like a child
>>63307098
>Lurk more, you'll see statements like this all the time.
I have seen them, regardless of what they say it is ridiculous. Metal Machine Music was a watershed moment in rock music history. The reaction to it is exactly what happens when a relatively popular artist does something that is so out there that their fans, and their critics can't even comprehend it or its legacy until decades later.
>>63307251
Quoted yourself silly
You misunderstood the purpose of me saying I don't call noise not music. Re-read what I said.
>Japanese image board
wew lad
Piero just upped it from a 7 to a 7.5
it's an 8 imo, decades ahead of it's time
>>63307305
can you please atleast acknowledge the fact that the only reason Lou Reed made the album was to spite his record company label and it was not meant as a breakthrough in music of any sort? Its fucking 64 minutes of guitar feedback man, jesus christ.
>>63307354
Lou's intentions do not matter, art lives outside of intention once it is created.
>>63307380
I respectfully disagree
>>63307354
The importance and value of art is created by the critic
The critic is the real artist.
>>63307399
Then you must not believe in serendipity.
>>63307342
he had it as an 8 at one point too, i'm pretty sure
>>63307412
>The critic is the real artist.
Scruffy pls go back to hoverhanding underaged girls.
>>63307412
think you're taking that a bit too far but regardless, interpretation is one thing intention is another. If the 'artist' did not intend on it being 'art' it should not be considered as such
>>63307451
it's basically just 'death of the author' you pleb
keep in mind a critic is anyone who forms an opinion about a work of art, regardless of whether or not they receive payment or accrue a following for doing so.
>>63307509
>it's basically just 'death of the author' you pleb
Already made this point when I claimed that Lou's intentions didn't matter.
>keep in mind a critic is anyone who forms an opinion about a work of art, regardless of whether or not they receive payment or accrue a following for doing so.
I don't think it's so cut and dry. I think that only the artist understands their work the way that they created it, but once it leaves them it takes on a different meaning, as per the critic remark.
Art is ultimately the product of a mind or invention. The artist is the one who creates it.
>>63307623
art is not something to be 'understood,' but rather 'interpreted,' or that's what i've always taken away from that line of thinking. an artist has an interpretation of their own work, as does anyone else who engages with it.
>>63306548
Bitch you can't insult my low knowledge of noise music after I've already insulted myself.
some people let me tell ya
