Both are about equal to me. Neither ever made a perfect album. Both had plenty of great, addictive songs. Neither constitute a healthy portion of my current listening. Both experimented within their own music.
I would extend the proto-punk label past VU and give it to the Beatles for Helter Skelter and Twist and Shout.
I love about as many songs from each, but VU did it in four albums.
Both had horrible style, hippy-shit and NY street rags; stick with fucking suits people.
My favorite songs between the two is from VU, but b/c of their droning nature the majority of my favorite sounds comes from the Beatles.
you can go back and forth about the negatives of each and generally come to the conclusion that they're both about the same and they're both good... which is why people should listen to Father Time because he's fucking great
Both are about equal to me. Neither ever made a perfect album. Both had plenty of great, addictive songs. Neither constitute a healthy portion of my current listening. Both experimented within their own music.
I would extend the proto-punk label past VU and give it to the Beatles for Helter Skelter and Twist and Shout.
I love about as many songs from each, but VU did it in four albums.
Both had horrible style, hippy-shit and NY street rags; stick with fucking suits people.
My favorite songs between the two is from VU, but b/c of their droning nature the majority of my favorite sounds comes from the Beatles.
you can go back and forth about the negatives of each and generally come to the conclusion that they're both about the same and they're both good... which is why people should listen to Father Time because he's fucking great
At least we can agree all about the fact that the VU are at least as big as the beatles, but what the fuck happened in the 60s, for the beatles to be so, so so much more popular than the VU ? Was the VU at that time more innovative and original ?
It's not so strange that Beatles became more POPULAR than the VU. The marketing of the Beatles was vastly superior to that of the VU and the sound was, even when they started experimenting, a lot more suitable for the mainstream listener. VU, because of their substantially more intimidating sound as well as the aggressively boundary-pushing lyrics did not stand a chance in the popularity contest.
Which band is better can be debated forever. They're both good but personally I prefer The Beatles.
At least we can agree all about the fact that the VU are at least as big as the beatles, but what the fuck happened in the 60s, for the beatles to be so, so so much more popular than the VU ? Was the VU at that time more innovative and original ?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
