Lou Reed
Metal Machine Music


2.5
average

Review

by Fort23 USER (29 Reviews)
June 28th, 2007 | 70 replies


Release Date: 1975 | Tracklist


Note:This is a rewrite of my early 5/5 review

I used to stick up for this album. I used to exclaim about the amounts of noise and emotion and black reality blah blah blah. I used to listen to this I think "Wow! This is neat!" and laugh at how advanced I thought my musical tastes were, and how much of a musical outsider I thought I was. All it was a simple piece of innocence and misunderstanding of what was sophisticated and what was cool and what not.

Now I think I have a better understanding of the record. It's pretty much an noise experiment done by the heavily drug addicted Lou Reed. He used recording techniques to record layers upon layers of guitar distortion and feedback, which created various shrieks and squeals over the enormous walls of sound. Ehh, sounds like fun, huh?
The album is an good way to blow off steam with, and surprisingly, to blow steam off with. All the masses of noise and squeals definitely pushes all the bad feelings out of your brain after a bad day, and when you're waking up, the overall chaos perfectly suites the fuzzy feelings, and wandering state that you're in.

A big problem, and one of the reasons the overall point, and body of the record fails, is it's length. Two side's worth of horrendous noise is quite an earful-actually one side is good enough, but two discs worth is pushing out the envelope and then some. Listening to the entire record all the way through is a pretty painful experience. By the beginning of the second disc, I was staring intently at the CD player, waiting for it to crack and explode and to take me out of this misery. The Horrendous noise was overtly bearing on me, and when I finally finished listening to it, I had a massive headache.

It was funny how only about ten minutes earlier, I was having quite a daydream while listening to the record. The earlier part of the album has that effect. It seems like all the noise coming through the speakers scatters your brain into different ideas that unite and form quit an interesting dream. These two differing ideas might make one think that the album's beginning and ending are different. Don't think that. The only reason the two discs have different effects is that your mind is fresh at the beginning of the album, and all this noise is something different and interesting. But by the end, it's same old, same old.

The records biggest importance is probably it's influence. Various noise records have come out over the years that certainly have roots in MMM, but expand with greater direction, and overall push. People like Rhys Chatham, and Glenn Branca have taken Reed's fundamental use of guitars in a noise sense, but pushed it into orchestration. In fact, Metal Machine Music is definitely a good platform to start listening to noise music. However, it's still been done better.



Recent reviews by this author
Lil Herb Welcome To FazolandToro Y Moi Causers of This
MellowHype NumbersSpaceGhostPurrp The NASA Tape
Tyler the Creator BastardGtuk Illusion to The Max
user ratings (200)
Chart.
1.9
poor
other reviews of this album
The Satan Ov The Hell (5)
...

Eno (4)
...


Comments:Add a Comment 
Fort23
June 28th 2007


2475 Comments


yeaThis Message Edited On 06.28.07

Fort23
June 28th 2007


2475 Comments


I'm not the only one. A lot of people get it but not enough.This Message Edited On 06.28.07

Ephex
June 28th 2007


730 Comments

Album Rating: 1.5

I like Lou Reed but this album isn't really that great. Listen to the first five minutes of it and thats basically all the album is, layers upon layers of feedback. It is executed rather well but I definately wouldn't call it a classic.

tribestros
June 28th 2007


918 Comments


I'm sorry.

I don't like this album.

At all.

But it was a good review because you backed up your points very well.This Message Edited On 06.28.07

blackmilk
June 28th 2007


584 Comments


This isn't a good review.


Kage
June 28th 2007


1172 Comments


You can't blame most people for not liking this. Most people want to listen to something pleasant, not dig deep and search for the meaning of a work of art.

Even then, it's not something you want to listen to that often. I like it as an amusing statement from Lou Reed, but in terms of noise there's other stuff I'll listen to first.

pulseczar
June 28th 2007


2385 Comments


Eh, even in terms of antagonizing noise, there's obviously better. I doubt Lou Reed put any real effort into this, and people who herald it as classic just draw that as individuals and not from the fact that there's anything behind this album.

ValiumMan
June 28th 2007


493 Comments


I liked the review, but it seemed more just like a rant about how you're the only one who "gets" this.

Agreed, except I don't believe in "getting" music.

Even then, it's not something you want to listen to that often. I like it as an amusing statement from Lou Reed, but in terms of noise there's other stuff I'll listen to first.

True dat as well.
This was probably the first "noise music" record ever and deserves credit for that, but Reed didn't do a lot with it. Instead of assembling the noise in some way (like modern noisicians do), he just recorded it. It's just a bunch of feedback, nothing more, nothing less. But he ain't to blame. He did it to piss off his record company and accidentally invented a genre.

burton.and.gas
June 28th 2007


641 Comments


your review was very well written, but on releasing this album lou himself said "anyone who gets to side four is more stupid than i am"(i assume ti is the equivalent of track 4). I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, it's just having read this review and that quote, sort of demeans this review. However, i wont judge yet, i'll try and get hold of this to listen to it. This Message Edited On 06.28.07

Zmev
June 29th 2007


983 Comments


Oh cool a gimmick account.

JohnXDoesn't
June 29th 2007


1282 Comments


lol i'm listening now its awful. should have called it Metal Machine WTFThis Message Edited On 06.29.07

SlantedAndEnchanted
June 29th 2007


26 Comments

Album Rating: 2.5

lou reed stated somewhere that he has never listened to the album the whole way through.
since he recorded it of course

pretty good review

AlienEater
June 29th 2007


716 Comments


5/5 hell yeah

dudeinthepassinglane
July 11th 2007


192 Comments


I've gotta try it.

Although, reviewer, you did rant. But you were successful in gettin me to give it a try, so congrats.

Fort23
July 11th 2007


2475 Comments


I definetly ranted.

joshuatree
Emeritus
August 20th 2007


3742 Comments


dude, settle down. this has gotten a lot of recongnition recently. not that the recongnition was deserved.

tribestros
August 20th 2007


918 Comments


I'm rather puzzled to why reviewers must go and stick up for truly shitty albums, like St. Anger and MMM.

This album was a joke.

Lou Reed agreed.

Two-Headed Boy
October 29th 2007


4527 Comments


It seems like you wrote this to try to establish yourself as an outsider or a rebel, but have you actually heard this? It's strange, yes, but it's awful.

That being said, it's not a poorly written review at all. Just completely, horribly wrong.This Message Edited On 10.29.07

Fort23
November 4th 2007


2475 Comments


Ya I know. review sucks and not a five. might rewrite, though i'm so unbelivably lazy.

iarescientists
November 4th 2007


5863 Comments


fort iz lame



You have to be logged in to post a comment. Login | Create a Profile





FAQ // STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // SITE FORUM // CONTACT US

Bands: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z


Site Copyright 2005-2014 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Privacy Policy