Some people have more money than brains

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&autorefresh=true&hash=item2561519864&item=160546527332&nma=true&pt=Music_on_Vinyl&rt=nc&si=0cSqYOi%252FAfXJMkgPg77MhJoxsXY%253D

Over $2,000 for Metallica's Black Album.

I might give 2,025 pesos for it!!

Sheesh... and I felt bad spending $20 on the Black Crowes Warpaint on vinyl.

According to the details on this item, there were only 50 copies in this configuration. Given that there were over 50 bids on it, I have to assume that's correct.

Still, must be nice to have the money to pi$$ away on something like this.

tohostudios wrote:

According to the details on this item, there were only 50 copies in this configuration. Given that there were over 50 bids on it, I have to assume that's correct.

Still, must be nice to have the money to pi$$ away on something like this.

i can think of a zillion better ways than to spend it on a $.99 cd...

exact33 wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

According to the details on this item, there were only 50 copies in this configuration. Given that there were over 50 bids on it, I have to assume that's correct.

Still, must be nice to have the money to pi$$ away on something like this.

i can think of a zillion better ways than to spend it on a $.99 cd...

cant agree any better

Wow thats a bit much for shitty Metallica from that time period.

I have way more money than brains.

And I'm poor.

I feel like I paid too much for my cd copy of the black album. And I got it for free

Too much by far yes, but calling The Black Album "smurf poo" sounds like the very ignorant and stereotypical "Metallica are SELLOUTS!" statement - Heavy Riffs, Awesome Solo's, MELODY - Sounds pretty damn good to me.

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Too much by far yes, but calling The Black Album "smurf poo" sounds like the very ignorant and stereotypical "Metallica are SELLOUTS!" statement - Heavy Riffs, Awesome Solo's, MELODY - Sounds pretty damn good to me.

Maybe it was not the thrash long time Metallica fans wanted, but it's far from garbage. I have a special place in my heart for this album because it was the album that began a 20 year love affair with metal.

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Too much by far yes, but calling The Black Album "smurf poo" sounds like the very ignorant and stereotypical "Metallica are SELLOUTS!" statement - Heavy Riffs, Awesome Solo's, MELODY - Sounds pretty damn good to me.

Here's the issue, for those of you who weren't there from the beginning (or there in the hey day that was 1983-1986), then you really will NEVER understand the feelings of the rest of us who were there. It's just one of those things where you had to be there, living it, breathing it, taking it all in... A perfect analogy would be me trying to argue with someone, who grew up as a teenager or adult in the 70's about Led Zeppelin or Black Sabbath and their stylistic changes, and stating that "Presence" or "Technical Ecstasy" really were on par with their previous efforts, even though I wasn't even into that music until years later. Now, I don't hate the Black album, BUT, it was radically different from their previous efforts, and due to the success of that album, I think those who had been there during those glorious years felt like the band we grew up with was abandoning its hard core fan base.

...and that is why you will never see me try to convince someone from a previous generation that they are wrong about their feelings as it pertains to certain bands and the stylistic changes that took place within those groups. To be honest, I wouldn't have a clue, since I wasn't there...

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Too much by far yes, but calling The Black Album "smurf poo" sounds like the very ignorant and stereotypical "Metallica are SELLOUTS!" statement - Heavy Riffs, Awesome Solo's, MELODY - Sounds pretty damn good to me.

Eeeeeasy, fanboy. Eeeeeaasy.

metalinmyveins wrote:

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Too much by far yes, but calling The Black Album "smurf poo" sounds like the very ignorant and stereotypical "Metallica are SELLOUTS!" statement - Heavy Riffs, Awesome Solo's, MELODY - Sounds pretty damn good to me.

Here's the issue, for those of you who weren't there from the beginning (or there in the hey day that was 1983-1986), then you really will NEVER understand the feelings of the rest of us who were there. It's just one of those things where you had to be there, living it, breathing it, taking it all in... A perfect analogy would be me trying to argue with someone, who grew up as a teenager or adult in the 70's about Led Zeppelin or Black Sabbath and their stylistic changes, and stating that "Presence" or "Technical Ecstasy" really were on par with their previous efforts, even though I wasn't even into that music until years later. Now, I don't hate the Black album, BUT, it was radically different from their previous efforts, and due to the success of that album, I think those who had been there during those glorious years felt like the band we grew up with was abandoning its hard core fan base.

...and that is why you will never see me try to convince someone from a previous generation that they are wrong about their feelings as it pertains to certain bands and the stylistic changes that took place within those groups. To be honest, I wouldn't have a clue, since I wasn't there...

Very well said!


The same could be said with fans who like the first three Journey albums vs the rest of their catalog and 70s Rush vs. 80s poppy Rush.

chewie wrote:

metalinmyveins wrote:

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Too much by far yes, but calling The Black Album "smurf poo" sounds like the very ignorant and stereotypical "Metallica are SELLOUTS!" statement - Heavy Riffs, Awesome Solo's, MELODY - Sounds pretty damn good to me.

Here's the issue, for those of you who weren't there from the beginning (or there in the hey day that was 1983-1986), then you really will NEVER understand the feelings of the rest of us who were there. It's just one of those things where you had to be there, living it, breathing it, taking it all in... A perfect analogy would be me trying to argue with someone, who grew up as a teenager or adult in the 70's about Led Zeppelin or Black Sabbath and their stylistic changes, and stating that "Presence" or "Technical Ecstasy" really were on par with their previous efforts, even though I wasn't even into that music until years later. Now, I don't hate the Black album, BUT, it was radically different from their previous efforts, and due to the success of that album, I think those who had been there during those glorious years felt like the band we grew up with was abandoning its hard core fan base.

...and that is why you will never see me try to convince someone from a previous generation that they are wrong about their feelings as it pertains to certain bands and the stylistic changes that took place within those groups. To be honest, I wouldn't have a clue, since I wasn't there...

Very well said!


The same could be said with fans who like the first three Journey albums vs the rest of their catalog and 70s Rush vs. 80s poppy Rush.

I totally agree!!! Even though I love everything with Steve Perry, I could understand how someone would be totally put off by what was even a bigger transformation that what Metallica took from the 80's to the 90's. Hell, Journey went from no lead singer and being a Jazz fusion band to a AOR band. Regarding Rush, I started listening to the band not too long after "Moving Pictures" was released. From there I went with the natural progression of "Signals" and onward. It wasn't until later where I discovered their more progressive side of the 70's, which I ended up liking better when it was all said and done.

metalinmyveins wrote:

chewie wrote:

metalinmyveins wrote:

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Too much by far yes, but calling The Black Album "smurf poo" sounds like the very ignorant and stereotypical "Metallica are SELLOUTS!" statement - Heavy Riffs, Awesome Solo's, MELODY - Sounds pretty damn good to me.

Here's the issue, for those of you who weren't there from the beginning (or there in the hey day that was 1983-1986), then you really will NEVER understand the feelings of the rest of us who were there. It's just one of those things where you had to be there, living it, breathing it, taking it all in... A perfect analogy would be me trying to argue with someone, who grew up as a teenager or adult in the 70's about Led Zeppelin or Black Sabbath and their stylistic changes, and stating that "Presence" or "Technical Ecstasy" really were on par with their previous efforts, even though I wasn't even into that music until years later. Now, I don't hate the Black album, BUT, it was radically different from their previous efforts, and due to the success of that album, I think those who had been there during those glorious years felt like the band we grew up with was abandoning its hard core fan base.

...and that is why you will never see me try to convince someone from a previous generation that they are wrong about their feelings as it pertains to certain bands and the stylistic changes that took place within those groups. To be honest, I wouldn't have a clue, since I wasn't there...

Very well said!


The same could be said with fans who like the first three Journey albums vs the rest of their catalog and 70s Rush vs. 80s poppy Rush.

I totally agree!!! Even though I love everything with Steve Perry, I could understand how someone would be totally put off by what was even a bigger transformation that what Metallica took from the 80's to the 90's. Hell, Journey went from no lead singer and being a Jazz fusion band to a AOR band. Regarding Rush, I started listening to the band not too long after "Moving Pictures" was released. From there I went with the natural progression of "Signals" and onward. It wasn't until later where I discovered their more progressive side of the 70's, which I ended up liking better when it was all said and done.

Moving Pictures and then Signals were my first two Rush purchases, so I understand. I never did understand the push for Journey to get a lead singer. The guy they had only sang on Santana's biggets hits and was an important component in that band. With that being said, I have fond memories of kicking back in the bed of my dad's truck listening to Escape.

metalinmyveins wrote:

I think those who had been there during those glorious years felt like the band we grew up with was abandoning its hard core fan base.

Fans should never think this.

Eyesore wrote:

metalinmyveins wrote:

I think those who had been there during those glorious years felt like the band we grew up with was abandoning its hard core fan base.

Fans should never think this.

You're undoubtedly right, but in most cases bands are catering to a teenage/young adult audience, who don't care to be enlightened by a directional change from a band. Most young people don't like the idea of change, whether it involves the music of their favorite band or anything else involving their lives. In fact, I would say change is one of the harder things for people to conquer in their lives. Change is met with fear, or in the case of Metallica's music, pessimism.

I agree with that. Unfortunately, even adults can't seem to let go of that teen angst. There are 45-year-old people out there who like Enya now, but are still pissed at Metallica for going soft. Haha.

Eyesore wrote:

metalinmyveins wrote:

I think those who had been there during those glorious years felt like the band we grew up with was abandoning its hard core fan base.

Fans should never think this.

Sometimes it's hard not to.

I totally get metalinmyveins point of view. While I can't say I was there from Day 1, I lived with those first few Metallica albums for quite some time. When the Black Album came out, it just seemed...different. Good, but different. By the time the Load albums rolled out, Metallica just seemed like a different band altogether than the one I grew up with. It was hard not to sceam "sell-outs!!"

Back on topic, I wish I had $2,000 that I could piss away like that.

Eyesore wrote:

I agree with that. Unfortunately, even adults can't seem to let go of that teen angst. There are 45-year-old people out there who like Enya now, but are still pissed at Metallica for going soft. Haha.

I guess the thing I couldn't wrap my brain around at the time was the idea that this could happen to a thrash band. Hell, one saw this with Motley Crue and Def Leppard and other bands in that scene, but this was a thrash band breaking new ground. I know though the members of Metallica never endorsed themselves as a thrash band back in the day, as they hated the whole label thing. It's kind of funny that they are embracing the thrash thing now, not only by rediscovering their thrash roots on "Death Magnetic", but then the decision to embrace those humble beginnings by playing with three of the other biggest thrash bands in the genre. Metallica is one of the few bands in history where they've come full circle.

I'll never understand fan mentalities altogether because I really don't care to understand them in the first place. My motto is I like what I like and you like what you like - if it happens that our tastes match by some random chance in the universe then that's cool we have something in common to talk about, otherwise it's equally alright that we have different tastes.

All these heavy explanations about why fans of a certain era feel the way they do really has nothing to do with me or you after all. The point about trying to convince someone that from some objective standard (which doesn't exist anyway) a band was better then than they are now is futile at best.

All that matters is what you as an individual like. It's not what the music critics tell you, or what other listeners want you to think is good, or even what fans of the band think. It's all up to you to make the decision whether or not you like a band or an album.

I hate it when others try to influence my tastes by concocting all sorts of cookie ideas for example, the whole true metal attitude and ideal. Why does any of that stuff matter anyway? If you're old enough to know yourself and know what you are about who cares what the rest of the fandom or haters think.

I'm not negating that we all have opinions about... well everything under the sun.. some are more informed than others but what really bothers me is when others try to convince you that what you like is not good enough, that it doesn't fit within some standard.

If you like the Black Album, hell even if you like St Anger I don't care. If you're happy and satisfied who the f*ck am I to argue with you?

A further dimension to what I already said above is that no band owes you anything (including Metallica).

The band is the artist and they write first and foremost for themselves, what they deem sounds good to them. This is another thing which bothers me about metalheads, they act as though the band is writing for them - no the band isn't writing music for anyone but themselves.

If the fans happen to like it then that's a good thing and people will buy the album. For example, Metallica thought St Anger was a good move - who knows why but that's what they thought and I cannot judge them for that - however most fans including some of the hardcore fans of the band thought otherwise. You can tell because the sales for St Anger were, by Metallica's standards quite atrocious. St Anger only sold a mere 1million copies and for a band like Metallica, given the number of people they draw to their concerts and the number of copies sold of previous albums that was pretty damn bad.

The point is the band wrote that album because that is what they thought was good at the time. They did not owe it to anyone but themselves to write a good album and satisfy their own creative mood.

As I see it "fans" have a number of options.

Firstly, do not listen / buy the album - pretty simple if you don't like it why bother with it. No one is forcing you to buy or listen to an album you do not like. And don't worry, the band won't go out of pocket because there will inevitably be some people who like the album. Case in point, The Black Album may have alienated some older fans but it certainly gain a cr*pload more than the band had up to that point. So there's no reason to "cry for me Argentina" ROFL the band will be okay.

Secondly, if you don't like what the band has become and you really cannot get into their recent albums either stick to their earlier albums or better yet check out some other bands that play a similar style. It's a pretty sensible thing to do and you're likely to get satisfaction out of discovering a whole new set of bands and albums.

Thirdly, (this applies if you have skill and talent) if you are really THAT dissatisfied with the state of music altogether why not form your own band, challenge yourself and the rest of us with some really good ass kickin music.

But as i said before, nobody owes you anything and certainly no band owes you anything no matter how much you may like their albums. whether it's Priest, Maiden, Metallica, Anthrax you name 'em they don't owe you anything at all.

I don't mind the Black Album these days, but when it first came out i was a bit disappointed.

I still can't get over their "extreme makeover" Load phase... even though they hit an all time low with that hideous piece of crap St Anger.

I have a cassette bootleg of a Metallica show with McGovney and Mustaine that was recorded on a player in this chicks purse. It sounds like crap, hisses and squeals, and only three or so songs are even listenable anymore. Why do I keep it ? Nothing to do with Metallica...she was a kewl chick and died way too young. Ya can't put a price on a memory.

what made this version of "Metallica" so pricey. I guess "mediocrity" in a different package increses it's value.