Death Magnetic is awesome!

Alex Dee Rokket wrote:

Unfortunately it has become very fashionable to hate on Metallica.

Some of us became quite fashionable then, when the Black album was released

And others of us became quite fashionable hating on them when they released the Grarage Days Rerevisited ep.

Death Magnetic is horrible and I think a lot of people need their ears cleaned.

To Alex....

The thing that makes Metallica a crappy band isn't anything to do with "fashionable" attributes of metalheads opinions. It has to do with them losing the hunger to push themselves to the the apex of thier abilities. Everybody in Metalllica is a former shell of what they once were in the ability and performance department. If I was to walk into a club and see a band that plays at the level that Metallica plays at nowadys. Well, I would split pretty fast, unless they were slinging out Guiness at a fair price. Sure they have the killer PA and all the bells and whistles that go along with headlining major festivals worldwide. The bottom line is they fail in the playing department. Members in most of the other bands that came up in the same era as them have become better players are can at least still play the older stuff without cutting corners. why this is ? IMHO it is due to the fact that those other bands have had to keep the chops up to feed the kids and pay the light bill. The guys in Metallica lost that spark years ago and to me are just going through the motions and playing the part. Sure they tour the planet and make plenty of cash. In the end, I wouldn't find any gratification or feel pushed in my ability's to jam with any of them.. I can find better players and those that play cause they have the hunger to do so in my local area. The way I see it. Metallica plays for the purpose of making money and whatever they call music that is produced in that process is lifeless and without merit. Music is an expression of the heart and soul. Those attributes began to disappear in Metallica's music some twenty years ago or more and now are completely non-existant. (IMHO)

James B. wrote:

To Alex....

The thing that makes Metallica a crappy band isn't anything to do with "fashionable" attributes of metalheads opinions. It has to do with them losing the hunger to push themselves to the the apex of thier abilities. Everybody in Metalllica is a former shell of what they once were in the ability and performance department. If I was to walk into a club and see a band that plays at the level that Metallica plays at nowadys. Well, I would split pretty fast, unless they were slinging out Guiness at a fair price. Sure they have the killer PA and all the bells and whistles that go along with headlining major festivals worldwide. The bottom line is they fail in the playing department. Members in most of the other bands that came up in the same era as them have become better players are can at least still play the older stuff without cutting corners. why this is ? IMHO it is due to the fact that those other bands have had to keep the chops up to feed the kids and pay the light bill. The guys in Metallica lost that spark years ago and to me are just going through the motions and playing the part. Sure they tour the planet and make plenty of cash. In the end, I wouldn't find any gratification or feel pushed in my ability's to jam with any of them.. I can find better players and those that play cause they have the hunger to do so in my local area. The way I see it. Metallica plays for the purpose of making money and whatever they call music that is produced in that process is lifeless and without merit. Music is an expression of the heart and soul. Those attributes began to disappear in Metallica's music some twenty years ago or more and now are completely non-existant. (IMHO)

Post of the year!

Fair enough James if that is how you see it. I can't really judge your opinion as either good or bad, and it's not that I am indifferent but it is your opinion and you're entitled to it.

My biggest problem and this isn't just in relation to Metallica is that fans generally jump on various bandwagons and there's usually two different categories of bandwagons. There are those who love the band and will only say good things about them and then there are those who hate the band and just love spewing hatred about them. It doesn't matter who the band is because the way you expressed your opinion I think if you were to take out the word Metallica and insert a different band that has made it big over the years the effect and outcome would be the same.

Whilst those who are total fanboys do annoy me on a personal level, I find those who hate much more difficult to tolerate and understand. Why hate, in fact why even bother going on about something you don't like? It seems like such a waste of breath and life really to ramble on about something that you evidently don't care about. Maybe I am missing something but when I talk to people I want to share what I like rather than what I hate - it just creates more tension and ultimately it doesn't say anything good about me.

I don't mind it if people say they don't like X band anymore - that's fine but what I am noticing is people going to really great lengths to justify to the point of making it some sort of standard rule why a certain band is no longer good. I don't think there is a standard by which any band can be held or any rules by which listeners must abide if they are to like a band.

You either like it or you don't and it's as simple as that.

James B. wrote:

To Alex....

The thing that makes Metallica a crappy band isn't anything to do with "fashionable" attributes of metalheads opinions. It has to do with them losing the hunger to push themselves to the the apex of thier abilities. Everybody in Metalllica is a former shell of what they once were in the ability and performance department. If I was to walk into a club and see a band that plays at the level that Metallica plays at nowadys. Well, I would split pretty fast, unless they were slinging out Guiness at a fair price. Sure they have the killer PA and all the bells and whistles that go along with headlining major festivals worldwide. The bottom line is they fail in the playing department. Members in most of the other bands that came up in the same era as them have become better players are can at least still play the older stuff without cutting corners. why this is ? IMHO it is due to the fact that those other bands have had to keep the chops up to feed the kids and pay the light bill. The guys in Metallica lost that spark years ago and to me are just going through the motions and playing the part. Sure they tour the planet and make plenty of cash. In the end, I wouldn't find any gratification or feel pushed in my ability's to jam with any of them.. I can find better players and those that play cause they have the hunger to do so in my local area. The way I see it. Metallica plays for the purpose of making money and whatever they call music that is produced in that process is lifeless and without merit. Music is an expression of the heart and soul. Those attributes began to disappear in Metallica's music some twenty years ago or more and now are completely non-existant. (IMHO)

I agree completely! If you're not going to put the effort in to play at the best of your ability, then don't play at all. The day you pick up your instrument and your heart is no longer in it you're done.

I felt that on DM, Metallica had lots of inspiration and great ideas that simply needed to be put together better.

SpectreFate wrote:

James B. wrote:

To Alex....

The thing that makes Metallica a crappy band isn't anything to do with "fashionable" attributes of metalheads opinions. It has to do with them losing the hunger to push themselves to the the apex of thier abilities. Everybody in Metalllica is a former shell of what they once were in the ability and performance department. If I was to walk into a club and see a band that plays at the level that Metallica plays at nowadys. Well, I would split pretty fast, unless they were slinging out Guiness at a fair price. Sure they have the killer PA and all the bells and whistles that go along with headlining major festivals worldwide. The bottom line is they fail in the playing department. Members in most of the other bands that came up in the same era as them have become better players are can at least still play the older stuff without cutting corners. why this is ? IMHO it is due to the fact that those other bands have had to keep the chops up to feed the kids and pay the light bill. The guys in Metallica lost that spark years ago and to me are just going through the motions and playing the part. Sure they tour the planet and make plenty of cash. In the end, I wouldn't find any gratification or feel pushed in my ability's to jam with any of them.. I can find better players and those that play cause they have the hunger to do so in my local area. The way I see it. Metallica plays for the purpose of making money and whatever they call music that is produced in that process is lifeless and without merit. Music is an expression of the heart and soul. Those attributes began to disappear in Metallica's music some twenty years ago or more and now are completely non-existant. (IMHO)

Post of the year!

I'll second that! Too bad that post is too long to sig!

scottmitchell74 wrote:

Death Magnetic came up again in my album rotation system and I keep thinking to myself two things;

1 - I can't believe how good this is!

2- I can't believe how much hate there is/was for this.



Metallica!

agreed
it does however run out of steam in the last few tracks Judas Kiss, Unforgiven III and My Apocalypse dont do anything for me

Alex Dee Rokket wrote:

Fair enough James if that is how you see it. I can't really judge your opinion as either good or bad, and it's not that I am indifferent but it is your opinion and you're entitled to it.

My biggest problem and this isn't just in relation to Metallica is that fans generally jump on various bandwagons and there's usually two different categories of bandwagons. There are those who love the band and will only say good things about them and then there are those who hate the band and just love spewing hatred about them. It doesn't matter who the band is because the way you expressed your opinion I think if you were to take out the word Metallica and insert a different band that has made it big over the years the effect and outcome would be the same.

Whilst those who are total fanboys do annoy me on a personal level, I find those who hate much more difficult to tolerate and understand. Why hate, in fact why even bother going on about something you don't like? It seems like such a waste of breath and life really to ramble on about something that you evidently don't care about. Maybe I am missing something but when I talk to people I want to share what I like rather than what I hate - it just creates more tension and ultimately it doesn't say anything good about me.

I don't mind it if people say they don't like X band anymore - that's fine but what I am noticing is people going to really great lengths to justify to the point of making it some sort of standard rule why a certain band is no longer good. I don't think there is a standard by which any band can be held or any rules by which listeners must abide if they are to like a band.

.

I bother cause you offered your opinion and so it goes. I prefer to give an opinion or point of view with an explanation. It takes the context to a whole different place. I can't say, "I don't like Metalica", cause I do. It is merely to a point. I have friends who are the opposite, yet the same as me. They like Metallica, but not the stuff before the black album"
See how saying almost the same thing can be totaly different?

I find it odd that you of all people find lengthy posts to be an issue

remember, the average attention span today is arou...

I liked DM but put it below the first 5 albums. I had no problems with the Black album, someone was going to do it and they actually wrote some good songs that got played to death so it wore out. The turds after that though had me scratching my head.

I thought it was ok and a definite step up from St Anger. It reminds me of the 80's albums yet not quite reaching the same heights that they did. The main detractor of the album is the "loudness" of the songs, rendering fairly good songs sometimes unlistenable.

James B. wrote:

Alex Dee Rokket wrote:

Fair enough James if that is how you see it. I can't really judge your opinion as either good or bad, and it's not that I am indifferent but it is your opinion and you're entitled to it.

My biggest problem and this isn't just in relation to Metallica is that fans generally jump on various bandwagons and there's usually two different categories of bandwagons. There are those who love the band and will only say good things about them and then there are those who hate the band and just love spewing hatred about them. It doesn't matter who the band is because the way you expressed your opinion I think if you were to take out the word Metallica and insert a different band that has made it big over the years the effect and outcome would be the same.

Whilst those who are total fanboys do annoy me on a personal level, I find those who hate much more difficult to tolerate and understand. Why hate, in fact why even bother going on about something you don't like? It seems like such a waste of breath and life really to ramble on about something that you evidently don't care about. Maybe I am missing something but when I talk to people I want to share what I like rather than what I hate - it just creates more tension and ultimately it doesn't say anything good about me.

I don't mind it if people say they don't like X band anymore - that's fine but what I am noticing is people going to really great lengths to justify to the point of making it some sort of standard rule why a certain band is no longer good. I don't think there is a standard by which any band can be held or any rules by which listeners must abide if they are to like a band.

.

I bother cause you offered your opinion and so it goes. I prefer to give an opinion or point of view with an explanation. It takes the context to a whole different place. I can't say, "I don't like Metalica", cause I do. It is merely to a point. I have friends who are the opposite, yet the same as me. They like Metallica, but not the stuff before the black album"
See how saying almost the same thing can be totaly different?

I find it odd that you of all people find lengthy posts to be an issue

hey James, I wasn't having a stab at your post. In fact my reply wasn't in any way directed at discrediting anything you said. It was more an observation of the sort of stuff I see on sites like blabbermouth which are notorious for hating all things Metallica related - or really just hating anything really but since Metallica ranks among one of the biggest and most recognisable metal bands it also attracts more hatred than the average metal band.

Alex Dee Rokket wrote:

hey James, I wasn't having a stab at your post. In fact my reply wasn't in any way directed at discrediting anything you said. It was more an observation of the sort of stuff I see on sites like blabbermouth which are notorious for hating all things Metallica related - or really just hating anything really but since Metallica ranks among one of the biggest and most recognisable metal bands it also attracts more hatred than the average metal band.

It's all good man!

Just becuase I defended my position doesn't mean that it bothered me.

Debate is a good thing. At least it didn't end up being that "you suck and I don't" trip. Anyways, take care!

Some really long posts...

I love when fans talk about musicians not having "heart and soul." I wish I was so intimately involved with so many famous people that I know precisely what they think and what motivates them to do what they do.

The worst part about fans of anything is that they're not charitable with how they see things. Has anyone here ever thought that Metallica's heart and soul is simply not in playing like they did as kids? That what they truly love doing now, what sparks their passion, is precisely what they are doing?

Anyone here who is over 30 and tries to pretend they're the same person they were at twenty, doing the same things, is either a liar or a loser. Simple as that.

The fact is, sometimes people grow out of things. Why not give people the benefit of the doubt? Why judge so harshly based on nothing but unfounded assumptions?

Eyesore wrote:

I love when fans talk about musicians not having "heart and soul." I wish I was so intimately involved with so many famous people that I know precisely what they think and what motivates them to do what they do.

The worst part about fans of anything is that they're not charitable with how they see things. Has anyone here ever thought that Metallica's heart and soul is simply not in playing like they did as kids? That what they truly love doing now, what sparks their passion, is precisely what they are doing?

Anyone here who is over 30 and tries to pretend they're the same person they were at twenty, doing the same things, is either a liar or a loser. Simple as that.

The fact is, sometimes people grow out of things. Why not give people the benefit of the doubt? Why judge so harshly based on nothing but unfounded assumptions?

You make valid points as a listener. If you have ever played in a band then you may know what I was refering to in the performance department. You put emphasis on assumption as well in your post, it just seems that you are allowed to be harsh and others are not in thier opininion(s)

James B. wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

I love when fans talk about musicians not having "heart and soul." I wish I was so intimately involved with so many famous people that I know precisely what they think and what motivates them to do what they do.

The worst part about fans of anything is that they're not charitable with how they see things. Has anyone here ever thought that Metallica's heart and soul is simply not in playing like they did as kids? That what they truly love doing now, what sparks their passion, is precisely what they are doing?

Anyone here who is over 30 and tries to pretend they're the same person they were at twenty, doing the same things, is either a liar or a loser. Simple as that.

The fact is, sometimes people grow out of things. Why not give people the benefit of the doubt? Why judge so harshly based on nothing but unfounded assumptions?

You make valid points as a listener. If you have ever played in a band then you may know what I was refering to in the performance department. You put emphasis on assumption as well in your post, it just seems that you are allowed to be harsh and others are not in thier opininion(s)

I played in bands from 14 to 30, but that doesn't give me any further insight into what another musician I've never met is thinking.

As for being harsh, I am not being harsh. I haven't given my opinion on this particular part of the conversation because I have no opinion, at least in terms of the whole "heart and soul" of Metallica argument. I don't know them personally, thus I don't know how they feel.

The rest of what I said is simply offering a more logical, charitable point. Nothing more. I am not saying that the guys in Metallica are truly doing what they love right now; I'm simply pointing out that it's far more likely they are.

It's not about "heart and soul", it's about priorities. They're married now with kids and their time is consumed with other things. No time to spend all day/week/month in the rehearsal room/studio working out all the details to make something truly great ... just put out something average (at best) and slap your logo on it to sell to the fanboys who can't tell the difference.

fair enough

The liar or loser quip could be constued as harsh ?

IMHO, Metallica lacks heart and soul anymore. I don't get how you think one can't have a valid view of that cause they don't know them personaly.


A while back, you called me on saying Tesla didn't have a Def Leppard vibe or influence on a few songs on the debut. Well, I do know them personally and have been told that certain tunes were influenced by them at that time. Does that make your opinion less valid? No it doesn't.
Just like "knowing" how a musician feels has nothing to do with a fan sayin the music lacks heart and soul. It is merely an opinion of what they hear and has nothing to do with personal interaction.


I can go into a bar or an arena and tell if a band was going through the motions or giving it something real without even knowing who they are. How does one differ between that being heart and soul or just a lot of practice? All I can answer is personal experience and having music mean something that others miss ? Sorry for dragging this on and on, I am just trying to explain myself without being an @$$.

To bad you quit playing in bands. Yet, you do have other outlets for creativity. Which I have checked out and enjoy.

I thought this band quite making lp's in the 90's?

Joe wrote:

SpectreFate wrote:

James B. wrote:

To Alex....

The thing that makes Metallica a crappy band isn't anything to do with "fashionable" attributes of metalheads opinions. It has to do with them losing the hunger to push themselves to the the apex of thier abilities. Everybody in Metalllica is a former shell of what they once were in the ability and performance department. If I was to walk into a club and see a band that plays at the level that Metallica plays at nowadys. Well, I would split pretty fast, unless they were slinging out Guiness at a fair price. Sure they have the killer PA and all the bells and whistles that go along with headlining major festivals worldwide. The bottom line is they fail in the playing department. Members in most of the other bands that came up in the same era as them have become better players are can at least still play the older stuff without cutting corners. why this is ? IMHO it is due to the fact that those other bands have had to keep the chops up to feed the kids and pay the light bill. The guys in Metallica lost that spark years ago and to me are just going through the motions and playing the part. Sure they tour the planet and make plenty of cash. In the end, I wouldn't find any gratification or feel pushed in my ability's to jam with any of them.. I can find better players and those that play cause they have the hunger to do so in my local area. The way I see it. Metallica plays for the purpose of making money and whatever they call music that is produced in that process is lifeless and without merit. Music is an expression of the heart and soul. Those attributes began to disappear in Metallica's music some twenty years ago or more and now are completely non-existant. (IMHO)

Post of the year!

I'll second that! Too bad that post is too long to sig!

Are you guys f#cking serious!? Who are you to judge how Metallica play their music, or if they're passionate about it or not? What exactly are your complaints about how they sound live? That James' voice isn't what it used to be? That the guitar tone is a little different? You guys have no clue what the guys of Metallica are thinking, and let me tell you, the coupla' times I've seen them live since the release of Death Magnetic were freakin' awesome! Now don't knock my entire post because I am a Metallica die-hard, but these guys are just as passionate about their music as anyone else, if not more. I whole-heartedly agree with Alex' post - all the hate is routed in envy - even when Metallica go and release a GREAT album, that's heavy, progressive, and contains all the solo's and lead work one could wish for, they just find something else to b!tch about - oh, the mastering is too loud, blah blah blah - how many of those classic 80s albums had that great of a sound anyway? Yeah, Yeah, with their backing they should be able to do it perfect, but I have no problem with the recording - those are luxury problems that I ain't snobby enough to care about. A former shell of what they used to be? Hardly - the reason why Metallica's early releases are viewed as great as they are (other than the fact that they ARE freakin' awesome), is that they were so innovative - even if Metallica had never shiftet styles, people would still claim that their early albums could never be topped. For me, Death Magnetic as elements that are just as awesome as anything off their first four (and five) releases - that riff that kicks in around the 1 minute mark in "Broken, Beat and Scarred" has got to be one of the most awesome riffs they have every written. Metallica have the power to write whatever they want, and just because they shifted styles in the 90s, doesn't mean they SUDDENLY lose all their ability - like Alex said, other bands have tried the more commercial/melodic route, and failed miserably - proving that their songwriting abilities aren't that great in that area - just because music is more complicated and complex, doesn't necessarily make it BETTER - most Heavy Metal fans just prefer that, myself included - I really like the load albums, I consider it a part of Metallica's development - for me, I see it as nothing more than a bonus that I can have so much diversity in one band - I mean, with 4 albums of classic, amazing Heavy Metal, who needs more consistently heavy releases? It's cool to hear them come up with some hard rocking melodic metal/rock with elements of blues and even country rock - more Metallica goodness! And now, they have returned to a heavier style, which did indeed please me - I think it's hilarious that people can enjoy pansy LA-rock music like Warrant, Poison and Motley Crue, and then hate on Metallica for releasing something that is maybe mellower than what they used to, but still far superior to that glam crap.

And Lurideath - just what exactly is "Horrid" about Death Magnetic?

Quote :

people can enjoy pansy LA-rock music like Warrant, Poison and Motley Crue, and then hate on Metallica for releasing something that is maybe mellower than what they used to

What? Who are you to judge how crappy glam bands play their music, or if their passionate about it or not? You know what to expect from those "glam crap" bands. For the most part, they don't change their sound, which you have to admit Metallica did in the 90's. As a result, when they come back with a "heavy" album, their credibility is lost to a lot of fans. That's great you've stuck with them, but there are some fans that have moved on to other bands and feel that Metallica have jumped the shark. It's all opinion. Don't get your knickers in a tangle.