All things Metallica

Quote :

St. Anger has that tin can snare drum...and that's about it.

The whole damn album is crap.

Witchfinder wrote:

I find it bizarre that someone would honestly argue that Load/Reload were not an attempt by Metallica to cash in on the "alternative rock" scene of the day. They changed their imagine, artwork, logo, sound etc... to reflect what THEY thought would sell. St. Anger is an album written by a band that is adrift, without any sense of the type of sound they wanted. The Black Album was clearly an attempt to go commercial. Can anyone honestly argue that ANY of those albums is ground-breaking???? Get real here. I like the Black Album but it's a very conventional hard rock/metal album. Load is about half okay and Reload is terrible. St. Anger is best not spoken about.

But you're not acknowledging the simple fact that Load and Reload do not sound like alt rock or grunge or nu-metal, or whatever was popular at the time.

As for St. Anger, just watch Some Kind of Monster. That documentary shows precisely why that album is the way it is. The band was a mess, thus the album is a mess. Unfortunately for us, the band tried to present it as some mind-boggling artistic statement, when in fact they should have buried it in the vault.

Once they sorted themselves out, they should have dismissed those recording sessions and started a new album. It's a reflection of a band and individuals in turmoil. It has nothing to do with them having nothing to copy, no bandwagon to jump onto.

As for the black album, we all know it was an attempt at mainstream success. It is not, however, a hard rock album. Maybe a few moments can be called rock, but that's a metal album through and through.

Black album? Bob Rock
Load/Reload? Bob Rock
St. Anger? Bob Rock

Lame ass producer? Bob Rock

S.D. wrote:

Black album? Bob Rock
Load/Reload? Bob Rock
St. Anger? Bob Rock

Lame ass producer? Bob Rock

And if you really want to see a band trying to be something they're not, which is what everyone claims those above-mentioned albums represent, then see Death Magnetic.

Eyesore wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

I find it bizarre that someone would honestly argue that Load/Reload were not an attempt by Metallica to cash in on the "alternative rock" scene of the day. They changed their imagine, artwork, logo, sound etc... to reflect what THEY thought would sell. St. Anger is an album written by a band that is adrift, without any sense of the type of sound they wanted. The Black Album was clearly an attempt to go commercial. Can anyone honestly argue that ANY of those albums is ground-breaking???? Get real here. I like the Black Album but it's a very conventional hard rock/metal album. Load is about half okay and Reload is terrible. St. Anger is best not spoken about.

But you're not acknowledging the simple fact that Load and Reload do not sound like alt rock or grunge or nu-metal, or whatever was popular at the time.

As for St. Anger, just watch Some Kind of Monster. That documentary shows precisely why that album is the way it is. The band was a mess, thus the album is a mess. Unfortunately for us, the band tried to present it as some mind-boggling artistic statement, when in fact they should have buried it in the vault.

Once they sorted themselves out, they should have dismissed those recording sessions and started a new album. It's a reflection of a band and individuals in turmoil. It has nothing to do with them having nothing to copy, no bandwagon to jump onto.

As for the black album, we all know it was an attempt at mainstream success. It is not, however, a hard rock album. Maybe a few moments can be called rock, but that's a metal album through and through.

Okay, Load and Reload are totally metal. I have a hard time distinguishing those albums from Reign In Blood because they sound so similar. Happy? The Black Album was their British Steel where they dumbed down their sound for commercial success. The only difference is, British Steel is a better album.

Eyesore wrote:

S.D. wrote:

Black album? Bob Rock
Load/Reload? Bob Rock
St. Anger? Bob Rock

Lame ass producer? Bob Rock

And if you really want to see a band trying to be something they're not, which is what everyone claims those above-mentioned albums represent, then see Death Magnetic.

Metallica does what Metallica wants to do. I never bought the "Bob Rock's fault" argument which makes them sound like victims. James and Lars know exactly what they want and act accordingly. Unfortunately, what they want is crap.

Death Magnetic is a bunch of riffs that are stitched and stapled together with Pro-Tools. It's the least organically created album I have ever heard.

S.D. wrote:

Black album? Bob Rock
Load/Reload? Bob Rock
St. Anger? Bob Rock

Lame ass producer? Bob Rock

Witchfinder wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

I find it bizarre that someone would honestly argue that Load/Reload were not an attempt by Metallica to cash in on the "alternative rock" scene of the day. They changed their imagine, artwork, logo, sound etc... to reflect what THEY thought would sell. St. Anger is an album written by a band that is adrift, without any sense of the type of sound they wanted. The Black Album was clearly an attempt to go commercial. Can anyone honestly argue that ANY of those albums is ground-breaking???? Get real here. I like the Black Album but it's a very conventional hard rock/metal album. Load is about half okay and Reload is terrible. St. Anger is best not spoken about.

But you're not acknowledging the simple fact that Load and Reload do not sound like alt rock or grunge or nu-metal, or whatever was popular at the time.

As for St. Anger, just watch Some Kind of Monster. That documentary shows precisely why that album is the way it is. The band was a mess, thus the album is a mess. Unfortunately for us, the band tried to present it as some mind-boggling artistic statement, when in fact they should have buried it in the vault.

Once they sorted themselves out, they should have dismissed those recording sessions and started a new album. It's a reflection of a band and individuals in turmoil. It has nothing to do with them having nothing to copy, no bandwagon to jump onto.

As for the black album, we all know it was an attempt at mainstream success. It is not, however, a hard rock album. Maybe a few moments can be called rock, but that's a metal album through and through.

Okay, Load and Reload are totally metal. I have a hard time distinguishing those albums from Reign In Blood because they sound so similar. Happy? The Black Album was their British Steel where they dumbed down their sound for commercial success. The only difference is, British Steel is a better album.

Ah, yes. The metal genre is only this—| |—wide argument. If it's not like Reign in Blood, it must be alt rock.

Never mind.

Eyesore wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

I find it bizarre that someone would honestly argue that Load/Reload were not an attempt by Metallica to cash in on the "alternative rock" scene of the day. They changed their imagine, artwork, logo, sound etc... to reflect what THEY thought would sell. St. Anger is an album written by a band that is adrift, without any sense of the type of sound they wanted. The Black Album was clearly an attempt to go commercial. Can anyone honestly argue that ANY of those albums is ground-breaking???? Get real here. I like the Black Album but it's a very conventional hard rock/metal album. Load is about half okay and Reload is terrible. St. Anger is best not spoken about.

But you're not acknowledging the simple fact that Load and Reload do not sound like alt rock or grunge or nu-metal, or whatever was popular at the time.

As for St. Anger, just watch Some Kind of Monster. That documentary shows precisely why that album is the way it is. The band was a mess, thus the album is a mess. Unfortunately for us, the band tried to present it as some mind-boggling artistic statement, when in fact they should have buried it in the vault.

Once they sorted themselves out, they should have dismissed those recording sessions and started a new album. It's a reflection of a band and individuals in turmoil. It has nothing to do with them having nothing to copy, no bandwagon to jump onto.

As for the black album, we all know it was an attempt at mainstream success. It is not, however, a hard rock album. Maybe a few moments can be called rock, but that's a metal album through and through.

Okay, Load and Reload are totally metal. I have a hard time distinguishing those albums from Reign In Blood because they sound so similar. Happy? The Black Album was their British Steel where they dumbed down their sound for commercial success. The only difference is, British Steel is a better album.

Ah, yes. The metal genre is only this—| |—wide argument. If it's not like Reign in Blood, it must be alt rock.

Never mind.

I believe I was employing a device called sarcasm. I happen to believe that genres do have parameters. This makes communication about the music easier. Call me crazy.

I would hope that you would acknowledge that Metallica during this period attempted to distance themselves from Metal. They even appeared at Lollapalooza which no one would ever confuse with Wacken Open Air. I believe that Load and Reload are Metallica's poor attempts at sounding alternative.

Witchfinder wrote:

I believe I was employing a device called sarcasm. I happen to believe that genres do have parameters. This makes communication about the music easier. Call me crazy.

I would hope that you would acknowledge that Metallica during this period attempted to distance themselves from Metal. They even appeared at Lollapalooza which no one would ever confuse with Wacken Open Air. I believe that Load and Reload are Metallica's poor attempts at sounding alternative.

Sorry. People actually argue like that around here. Haha.

Anyway, I think a lot of things fans fail to acknowledge is that music is a band's job, their livelihood. Why get angry that Metallica played Lollapalooza? You would, too! Sometimes it is about money, and that's completely okay.

Usually, though, a band changing is natural. I don't think Metallica tried to distance themselves from metal at all. Nor do I think most musicians do that sort of thing in general. I think Metallica, like other musicians and people of all walks of life, just evolved, they wanted to do something different. Load and Reload sound natural to me; they solid rock albums. Not alternative, just rock. And that's okay.

Everyone wants bands to stay the same, yet they're 40-year-olds themselves and they're listening to Enya and drinking wine every night. It's understandable that they've gotten older and changed, but it's not okay for musicians to do the same thing. So they go and come up with all these ridiculous theories on why a band did this, why they did that. In reality, the musicians changed for the same reasons we all change, and that often reflects in their art.

But it can't be that, right? They must have sold out! They must be trying to distance themselves from metal! They're ashamed of their past! Blah blah blah. It doesn't make sense.

To me.......whatever you "label" Metallica's musical endeavors over the past 20 something years as. They made adult decisions and were fortunate that they were as succesfull as they were with the choices they made. I personaly don't dig much of what they recorded, although that is more towards what they could of done as opposed to what they did do.

IMHO, they dumbed down their musicianship to make money and overthought what was marketable.
They said they cut off the hair because the hair didn't write the music. If they would of had that same approach when they first hit the scene. Lars' art collection and band therapy would of never happened. They embraced the long haired image and rock and roll lifestyle all the way to the bank. I admire that they "tried" to distance themselves from that when re-defining themselves, except.............they just managed to trade one image for another. A marketing ploy that claimed to be one thing but was actually the same thing as before. Just different. They alienated themselves from the teenage stoner kid crowd and the hair cuts and different musical style catered to a new demographic. A brand new audience with different life priorities and deeper pockets. In a nut shell.....call it a home grown americana enterprise going public and incorparating on the open market. I can't and won't blame them for wanting to make money. They just insult one's intelligence when they say it's about creating something new musically that in the end is just a conceived product marketed to whatever group of consumers is gonna make the most money. Interesting how they "attempt" to revisit the aggressive stylings of the 1980's then all of a sudden decide to do a tour with all the other 1980's bands.

Eyesore wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

I believe I was employing a device called sarcasm. I happen to believe that genres do have parameters. This makes communication about the music easier. Call me crazy.

I would hope that you would acknowledge that Metallica during this period attempted to distance themselves from Metal. They even appeared at Lollapalooza which no one would ever confuse with Wacken Open Air. I believe that Load and Reload are Metallica's poor attempts at sounding alternative.

Sorry. People actually argue like that around here. Haha.

Anyway, I think a lot of things fans fail to acknowledge is that music is a band's job, their livelihood. Why get angry that Metallica played Lollapalooza? You would, too! Sometimes it is about money, and that's completely okay.

Usually, though, a band changing is natural. I don't think Metallica tried to distance themselves from metal at all. Nor do I think most musicians do that sort of thing in general. I think Metallica, like other musicians and people of all walks of life, just evolved, they wanted to do something different. Load and Reload sound natural to me; they solid rock albums. Not alternative, just rock. And that's okay.

Everyone wants bands to stay the same, yet they're 40-year-olds themselves and they're listening to Enya and drinking wine every night. It's understandable that they've gotten older and changed, but it's not okay for musicians to do the same thing. So they go and come up with all these ridiculous theories on why a band did this, why they did that. In reality, the musicians changed for the same reasons we all change, and that often reflects in their art.

But it can't be that, right? They must have sold out! They must be trying to distance themselves from metal! They're ashamed of their past! Blah blah blah. It doesn't make sense.

I don't really think they "sold out" at all. I think Metallica have always been about money and success. There's nothing wrong with that either. I am disappointed with the directions they took but they are free to record anything they like. I just happen to think that Metallica has always been about business first. They are calculating businessmen and their art reflects this bent. They make Gene Simmons look like a piker. I think it's fairly easy to plot the sound of their albums based on what's selling at the time.

Can we at least agree that Metallica threads always deliver??

I can't really fault Metallica in exploring different sounds and styles... Only certain bands can tolerate putting out the same thing year after year like Motorhead, Slayer and Overkill.

Witchfinder wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

S.D. wrote:

Black album? Bob Rock
Load/Reload? Bob Rock
St. Anger? Bob Rock

Lame ass producer? Bob Rock

And if you really want to see a band trying to be something they're not, which is what everyone claims those above-mentioned albums represent, then see Death Magnetic.

Death Magnetic is a bunch of riffs that are stitched and stapled together with Pro-Tools. It's the least organically created album I have ever heard.

You know what I hear when reading this post? I hear nothing short of the same crap I've been reading since Death Magnetic was released - personally, I think Death Magnetic is a GREAT album! - Load and ReLoad are truly great albums as well, of not better - how dare people label those albums alternative? There is NOTHING alternative about them - just because they're far removed from what Metallica used to sound like, doesn't make them alternative - one thing I thought was freakin' funny about the criticism of Metallica was, that some reviewers/fans could listen to Ratt/Poison and LOVE it, yet hate everything Metllica puts out. Seriously, just LISTEN to Load/ReLoad - there is absolutely NOTHING alternative about that music - it is Hard Rock/Heavy Metal ala Metallica. I'm so f#cking tired of these haters, be it young or old, ignorant or religious - you really should open your eyes and come to the realization that Metallica don't give a living F*CK about what you think - they know their fans, and if you keep on slandering them, they know you aint a true fan. So just f*ck off, haters.

Witchfinder wrote:

Metallica does what Metallica wants to do. I never bought the "Bob Rock's fault" argument which makes them sound like victims. James and Lars know exactly what they want and act accordingly. Unfortunately, what they want is crap.

Death Magnetic is a bunch of riffs that are stitched and stapled together with Pro-Tools. It's the least organically created album I have ever heard.

Bingo!

Mglaffas81 wrote:

I'm so f#cking tired of these haters, be it young or old, ignorant or religious - you really should open your eyes and come to the realization that Metallica don't give a living F*CK about what you think - they know their fans, and if you keep on slandering them, they know you aint a true fan. So just f*ck off, haters.

I bet you'd do James or Lars if they'd let you

to Mglaffas81's post

Call me crazy (really I don't mind it) but I love the crap outta Death Magnetic. And I'll go WAAY out on a limb as well and say I love the crap outta St. Anger too. To my ears its just a badass, raw as hell metal record that I can't listen to without giving myself a concusion

I don't give a crap who would have recorded these records Metallica or otherwise, I just like em and don't give a crap what other metalheads think about it.

my two cents. (I know... theres no acounting for taste! lol)

Mglaffas81 wrote:

You know what I hear when reading this post? I hear nothing short of the same crap I've been reading since Death Magnetic was released

Well a lot of the 'crap' about the album is something i can agree on.
I'm not the biggest fan of Metallica (i still think that Lars Ulrich needs some drum lessons) i think it's their best album since at least the Black Album. There's the Guitar Hero version of the album that sounds really good and shows the potential those songs have.
While what was released on CD is another sad, very sad, example of the Loudness War with ProTools and Autotune on top of it. There's no dynamics, there's no headroom for the music, it's just noise and lots of digital clipping.
If it was produced the same way as Master of Puppets, it would be considered one of the best Metal albums of the past 10 years.

Lock this one up so we can start all over!

nah!

I don't want to lock it, I just want to see if we can get it to 50 pages!

You know if you listen to Death Magnetic cranked thru really sh!tty speakers that whole production thing becomes a non-issue. I don't really like listening to DM thru headphones, but pumping thru the piece of junk stereo in my work vehicle it sounds fantastic! Just LOUD obnoxious guitar metal for a drive or for motivation while working.

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

S.D. wrote:

Black album? Bob Rock
Load/Reload? Bob Rock
St. Anger? Bob Rock

Lame ass producer? Bob Rock

And if you really want to see a band trying to be something they're not, which is what everyone claims those above-mentioned albums represent, then see Death Magnetic.

Death Magnetic is a bunch of riffs that are stitched and stapled together with Pro-Tools. It's the least organically created album I have ever heard.

You know what I hear when reading this post? I hear nothing short of the same crap I've been reading since Death Magnetic was released - personally, I think Death Magnetic is a GREAT album! - Load and ReLoad are truly great albums as well, of not better - how dare people label those albums alternative? There is NOTHING alternative about them - just because they're far removed from what Metallica used to sound like, doesn't make them alternative - one thing I thought was freakin' funny about the criticism of Metallica was, that some reviewers/fans could listen to Ratt/Poison and LOVE it, yet hate everything Metllica puts out. Seriously, just LISTEN to Load/ReLoad - there is absolutely NOTHING alternative about that music - it is Hard Rock/Heavy Metal ala Metallica. I'm so f#cking tired of these haters, be it young or old, ignorant or religious - you really should open your eyes and come to the realization that Metallica don't give a living F*CK about what you think - they know their fans, and if you keep on slandering them, they know you aint a true fan. So just f*ck off, haters.

Lighten up, Francis. Guess what? Metallica put out a product. I purchased said product. I found said product lacking. I issued an opinion. That's the way this goes.

Mglaffas81 wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Eyesore wrote:

S.D. wrote:

Black album? Bob Rock
Load/Reload? Bob Rock
St. Anger? Bob Rock

Lame ass producer? Bob Rock

And if you really want to see a band trying to be something they're not, which is what everyone claims those above-mentioned albums represent, then see Death Magnetic.

Death Magnetic is a bunch of riffs that are stitched and stapled together with Pro-Tools. It's the least organically created album I have ever heard.

You know what I hear when reading this post? I hear nothing short of the same crap I've been reading since Death Magnetic was released - personally, I think Death Magnetic is a GREAT album! - Load and ReLoad are truly great albums as well, of not better - how dare people label those albums alternative? There is NOTHING alternative about them - just because they're far removed from what Metallica used to sound like, doesn't make them alternative - one thing I thought was freakin' funny about the criticism of Metallica was, that some reviewers/fans could listen to Ratt/Poison and LOVE it, yet hate everything Metllica puts out. Seriously, just LISTEN to Load/ReLoad - there is absolutely NOTHING alternative about that music - it is Hard Rock/Heavy Metal ala Metallica. I'm so f#cking tired of these haters, be it young or old, ignorant or religious - you really should open your eyes and come to the realization that Metallica don't give a living F*CK about what you think - they know their fans, and if you keep on slandering them, they know you aint a true fan. So just f*ck off, haters.

Settle down, you dingleberry! Jeez.

DevZor wrote:

You know if you listen to Death Magnetic cranked thru really sh!tty speakers that whole production thing becomes a non-issue. I don't really like listening to DM thru headphones, but pumping thru the piece of junk stereo in my work vehicle it sounds fantastic! Just LOUD obnoxious guitar metal for a drive or for motivation while working.

That's basically why we have the loudness war. More and more people use MP3, use MP3 players and crappy headphones (everytime i see someone using an iPod with those horrible iPod earplugs, i just want to cringe...how can anyone enjoy that?) or crappy PC Speakers and thinks if they "take it up to eleven" it sounds awesome.
People dislearned to hear a good audio quality. You see so many kids and teens blaring music through their cell phone speaker and think it's great. It makes me sad.