All things Metallica

exact33 wrote:

mc666 wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Temple of Blood wrote:

Fat Freddy wrote:

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

My thoughts exactly.

Seriously.

Same here. I will need to hear some serious samples before I spend money on this project.

x5. i'll wait for the Elvis Costello/Exodus collaboration.

or the Deborah Gibson/Immortal project.

I wish there was such a project in the works, I would buy it in a heartbeat.

Track listing revealed:

The musical collaboration between Lou Reed and METALLICA, "Lulu", will be released on November 1 in North America via Warner Bros. Records and one day earlier (October 31) in the rest of the world through Universal Music. The CD was co-produced by Reed, METALLICA, Hal Willner — who has produced albums for Reed, Marianne Faithfull, and Laurie Anderson, among others — and Greg Fidelman. Fidelman also mixed the record.

"Lulu" final track listing:

01. Brandenburg Gate (4:19)
02. The View (5:17)
03. Pumping Blood (7:24)
04. Mistress Dread (6:52)
05. Iced Honey (4:36)
06. Cheat On Me (11:26)
07. Frustration (8:33)
08. Little Dog (8:01)
09. Dragon (11:08)
10. Junior Dad (19:28)


I am intrigued - two songs at 11 minutes and one at almost 20??????? Hope they are good - I will give it a chance and have no expectations on what it will sound like. Hopefully it;s good

thejokeriv wrote:

two songs at 11 minutes and one at almost 20???????

I repeat: Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

I'm seeing a problem with this project from the get go, at least reception wise.

On one hand we have 75% of Metallica fans: 12 - 16 year old kids who think Metallica invented metal and are second only to avenged sevenfold and slipknot in metalness. No doubt facebook will be flooded with posts from them proclaiming "da nu tallica albm is fukin ga-hey!! sum old guy is singin nd hes a pileofsticks dare r no moshin songs nd metalica r gone homo!!!!!11!!"

On the other hand we have 75% of Lou Reed fans: Pompous assholes who consider themselves above music that is "fun" or "energetic" who will also hate this.

Personally, I'm interested but I don't have very high hopes. I'm sure this is rock n' roll blasphemy but I find The Velvet Underground/Lou Reed boring as hell, I just don't "get" it. There's such a huge leap in genre I between these two I don't know what to expect but it seems a bit ambitious to work out. But who knows, maybe with Metallica behind him Lou Reed's music will get that bite I find it lacking.

I guess this is the cover?







I'm firmly in the interested-but-not-excited camp. I curious to hear how this works out.

Musicians that are fans of each other recording an album together. That's literally ALL that is going on here.

More upper echelon musicans SHOULD do this exact type of thing, if nothing else it gives the genre-nazis headaches and that is ALWAYS a good thing in my book.

I couldn't even think who Lou Reed was until I did a search. Didn't realize he did songs I actually knew hahaha. Its a weird pairing but I can't really see it being bad. The only truly bad thing Metallica ever put there name on was St. Anger and by now even that has just become almost accepted.

The only thing is they came back with a sort of back to their routes album with Death Magnetic and then they do this. I don't see any fast songs coming out of this but who knows. I could've actually seen this happen back when Load and Re-Load came out. This would have definetly fit around that era with where they were.

I always give metallica a shot though. They have always been a great band to me even if I don't look up to them like I used to. I'm always up for something new.

I'm with Hitler on this one.

Approval Guy wrote:

I'm seeing a problem with this project from the get go, at least reception wise.



On the other hand we have 75% of Lou Reed fans: Pompous assholes who consider themselves above music that is "fun" or "energetic" who will also hate this.

Personally, I'm interested but I don't have very high hopes. I'm sure this is rock n' roll blasphemy but I find The Velvet Underground/Lou Reed boring as hell, I just don't "get" it. There's such a huge leap in genre I between these two I don't know what to expect but it seems a bit ambitious to work out. But who knows, maybe with Metallica behind him Lou Reed's music will get that bite I find it lacking.

I guess one of those pompous assholes who consider themselves above music that is fun or energetic because I am a fan of Lou Reed and find his work as both a solo artist and a member of the Velvet Underground, an excellent, challenging and music that is far from boring

Fat Freddy wrote:

thejokeriv wrote:

two songs at 11 minutes and one at almost 20???????

I repeat: Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

I'm with FF; a 20 minute Metallica song? Even with Lou Reed, shoot me now.

Meh, what's with the whining? We are lucky enough to live in a world where no-one is forced to listen to anything they don't want to.

I never even heard Re-Load myself.

Lari wrote:

Meh, what's with the whining? We are lucky enough to live in a world where no-one is forced to listen to anything they don't want to.

I never even heard Re-Load myself.

Consider yourself blessed, sir

I thought Metallica usimg Marianne Faithful was weird, but turned out okay.
This one will be worth a spin too, as it will probably be better than the St.Anger album at least.

I think may have said this before, but in reality this sounds more like a Lou Reed album then a Metallica album, if you are not a Lou Reed fan before I am almost postive that this album will not change your mind.

I think it should be interesting because in my very humble opinion, even Lou Reed's artistic misfires are interesting, also think it is cool for an artist who's recording career stretches back to 1967, even further if you count Reed's years as a session musician and writer of novelity tunes for Pickwick records, that at the age of 69, he is willing to take chances and not play it safe.

I also think it is cool that Metallica is going way outside their comfort zone and working with an artist that musically they have very little incommon with, these guys are separted by not only genre, but also culturally, the San Francisco thrash scene that Metallica came from, was a lot different then Velvet Underground's Andy Warhol's art workshop world they sprang up from.

http://www.amazon.com/The-View/dp/B005NN6N6O

Eww.

Eyesore wrote:

http://www.amazon.com/The-View/dp/B005NN6N6O

Eww.

Ohhh yeah, it's official. PASS on this one.

Its only like 30 seconds of a song how can you make a judgement on that?

Phoenix Reign Drummer wrote:

Its only like 30 seconds of a song how can you make a judgement on that?

Quite easily.

This was a bad idea from the start... The vocals are crap.

It's still hard to believe that the band that made Ride The Lightning could be reduced to this... Load and St Anger were big disappointments, but this is waaay out there.

That clip sure didn't do anything for me. I wasn't expecting it to.

Troublezone wrote:

It's still hard to believe that the band that made Ride The Lightning could be reduced to this... Load and St Anger were big disappointments, but this is waaay out there.

Am I the only one that seems to realise that this is far more a Lou Reed album featuring Metallica than vice versa?

Approval Guy wrote:

Troublezone wrote:

It's still hard to believe that the band that made Ride The Lightning could be reduced to this... Load and St Anger were big disappointments, but this is waaay out there.

Am I the only one that seems to realise that this is far more a Lou Reed album featuring Metallica than vice versa?

Nope I have said that from the beginning and since I am a Lou Reed fan I am sure I will enjoy it.

We all know it's more a Lou Reed record. It was interesting to hear Hetfield sing a bit on that clip, though. I wasn't expecting that.

Either way, Lou Reed still sucks.

Eyesore wrote:

We all know it's more a Lou Reed record. It was interesting to hear Hetfield sing a bit on that clip, though. I wasn't expecting that.

Either way, Lou Reed still sucks.

Lou Reed doesn't like you either!!