You have Google nikka lmao. You've clearly never been to LA, so use your Google and stop acting like an LA authority...
LA looks different from what you're used to because it's on the other side of the continent with a fully and completely different geography and climate. It has suburban areas because it has enormous city boundaries, yet still has an overall population density over ~8500, which is more or close to fabled "urban" East Coast cities like Providence, Hartford, Bridgeport, New Haven, Worcester, Buffalo, Rochester, Albany, Pittsburgh, Allentown, and Baltimore---->all cities that "look" how you think urban cities should but are less urban than LA...
And again, Central+South LA is larger than Philly by about 125,000 people, in 25 less square mileage. Central and South LA individually are both larger than the entire cities of Boston and DC, denser than both Boston and DC, and both lesser square mileage than DC...all cities that "look" how you think urban cities look...
Neither Philadelphia nor DC have Census tracts over 75k/ppsm. Los Angeles has like 15. But there's no urban neighborhoods in LA hahaha....
No offense Black Man, but I don't need you to buy into anything. You're hellbent on willful ignorance, just admit you spoke out of turn. Urbanity doesn't take on one form or fashion. The Northeast was developed earlier than anywhere else in the US and they were European influenced, that's why it looks different. New York is on a different plane of unique because even other urban NE places pale in comparison, but NY is not the only urban place in the US, and the Northeast isn't the only urban region...