Guitar Tricks - St Anger Verdict?

aiwass

06-06-2003, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by SLY
A couple of weeks ago I downloaded the full album which turned out to be fake , but I just thought that James was just using some new vocals effects... The fake album had some nice solos too!

Now after getting the real one , I have to say that the fake album was BETTER ... St Anger is not any better than an average Nu Metal album , and it doesn't sound new and unique as a Metallica album should be.

The only good thing in the album is that the bass parts sounds better now ... Trujilo got better tone from technique and gear than Newsted.

I think I got some stuff from the fake album too. The song that was supposed to be St. Anger KICKED ASS! Awesome stuff, with a nice, good ol' Hammett solo. Where was that stuff from? Someone had to record it.The sound quality was good (better than the real one), and it really did sound like Metallica, even the vocals.

aiwass

06-06-2003, 10:54 AM

BTW, I hated the real songs. St. Anger sucks...

SLY

06-06-2003, 11:01 AM

I have a fake song that was supposed to be "some kind of monster" , it has great rhythms and a good slow solo with a little shred part that sounded like old Hammet , and the vocals wasn't very different than James' ... The real Metallica song is total crap compared to that fake one !!!

I'm realy looking to know who does these stuff originaly belong too , but I don't know how ?!

chucklivesoninmyheart

06-06-2003, 12:11 PM

I was sitting around with the friends sipping some suds when all of a sudden... really crappy "music" eminated from the radio.Not unusual these days.I remember The vocals sounding generic the guitars slightly muddy but the drums in particular stood out with a "trashcanny garage" quality.There was no grasping the song as it was poorly written.I passed it off as godsmack's latest effort(haha!...effort!)and ranted on with the friends regarding "nu-metal" like we often do.When the song was over I got up to throw in some good ol' Krisiun(black force domain)but as I was about to rid us of corporate product music for the night the "dj" announced that the generic,muddy,trashy,garage quality "music" that soiled our ears was infact.....get ready....Metallica!!!(yeah you wasted your time reading this just to find out what you already knew....look!..your still reading!)I didnt speak a word...I threw in the Krisiun cd and sat down.We drank the rest of the night with "shame" written on our faces...me the most for I had an old school metallica shirt on.Just another let down from the disapointment masters themselves.Oh well.

Axl_Rose

06-06-2003, 12:26 PM

Im interested to see how they go about touring! Which songs are they goin to play live? Do you think they know (metallica members) just how bad the album is!! HOW IS THERE NO GUITAR SOLOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SLY

06-06-2003, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by Axl_Rose
Do you think they know (metallica members) just how bad the album is!!

Good Point ... We'll (& they'll) find out, eventually !

LOL

metalisbest

06-06-2003, 04:11 PM

Its alright. There just isn't anything that stands out like in the other albums.

theeshredder

06-07-2003, 12:53 AM

i am getting tierd of ppl wanting to relive the ****in 80's. **** you dick heads its the ****in past get over it and the comment about there being no solos,i think thats genious **** i am sick of hearing solos the "80's" BURNT THEM OUT they all sound the same after awhile,there all the same notes just played slower or at different rhythms or differnt patern.i think the new album is good they said from the begining it was going to be very different and it is they did exactly what they said and the other thing about the music sounding like metallica it isnt them i remeber about a year ago there was this big hype about a band because the singer sounds exacly the same as james and it was really hardcore metal i forgot the name but ill post it when i remeber it oh yeah if you ppl didnt know already i guess ill inform you again THE 80'S ARE OVER AND DONE WITH SO STOP BITCHING LIKE LIL BABYS. :{

chucklivesoninmyheart

06-07-2003, 02:34 AM

And you call yourself theeshreder!!!Shame!Its not our fault that you cant appreciate a solo let alone play one!Go play yer "genious" stale double stop riffs.The shining moments of genres such as death,grindcore,black,epic,neo classical,thrash,speed e.c.t were in the 80's.The 80's were the golden age of guitar technique innovation.Take a trip back in time and play your solo-less boring rhythms and watch as everyone thats not musically simple minded laughs at you for being so frigin retarded.Pedal tones comprise 75/80% of ALL metal rhythms.Do you know how pedal tones originated on the guitar?(besides classical)OOooops...I forgot..you dont understand lead guitar.

theeshredder

06-07-2003, 03:11 AM

dont you get it moron what im saying is that just because a song dosent have a solo doesnt mean it sucks there are alot of good songs that dont have solos and dont get me wrong i like the 80's music its just you cant keep living in the ****in past and if you wanna duel you can meet me at guitar wars.com so i can cut your piece of **** head off you ignorant bastard then we will see who know how to play and ill let you play in standard tuning and ill use all different tuning just to show you my logic of the fret board

micheldejong

06-07-2003, 04:31 AM

hahahhaha, what a thread. I take it this new metallica album is quite laughable from what I read here. Stopped following what they did anyway as soon as they became a pop band.

icecool

06-07-2003, 09:30 AM

haha, this is great.

Oh, and theshredder, you are just rambling adding in as many '*'s as you can.

also, this :

'ill use all different tuning just to show you my logic of the fret board'

means absolutely nothing. If you did have a superior knowledge of the fret board, you wouldn't have to use a different tuning, you would have everythinhg you needed at your disposal...well for 'shredd'ing anyway.

aiwass

06-07-2003, 12:23 PM

Theeshredder - a couple of things:

"Thee" is a personal pronoun in Shakespearean English, being the receiving form of "you". I think the phrase you are looking for is THE shredder (notice capitalization for emphasis).

All guitar solos sound the same? Well maybe yours do, but I know for sure that mine, and 90% of all solos for that matter, don't. Perhaps it's just that your ear isn't developed enough to outline harmonic movement and melodic content? Also, I think the structural "formula" that modern music follows is a much bigger problem than the use of solos. Doesn't anyone listen to classical music anymore? Oh right... they don't...

The fact that you refer to yourself as THE shredder, and invite a complete stranger to a guitar battle in which you say you will tune your guitar randomly and still "cut his ****ing head off" says something about your ego issues. My guess is, you're out on the internet looking for people who will worship you for your amazing skill and talent, seeing as you're the only one in your high school who can pull off the solo to "Fade to Black", you suffer from a lot of suppressed agression, seeing as girls never want to talk to you, and you have a small penis.

Sit down, cool off, and take some Ritalin...

chucklivesoninmyheart

06-07-2003, 01:28 PM

LOL
I know what theeshredder means about the whole "It has no solo so it sucks" thing.I just feel an over the top solo can only enhance a song.Solo's can make a bland song listenable.I probably wouldnt listen to Judas Priest's "painkiller" if it wasnt for that great solo.I would also like to point out that you can take any lead phrase and play it at any position on the 6th string and presto!Youve got a "riff".Rhythms are(a vast majority anyway)in essence lead licks and phrases played at lower pitch.The reason why metallica and so many other "nu-ish" corporate product bands dont write(like they actually write anything)complicated rhythms and solo's is to appeal to a much wider audience.Not everyone plays guitar or has a musical ear to appreciate complex music."Musically simple minded" people look for looks/popularity/a crowd/the band members themselves and lyrics to relate to.Its no coincidence that many "musically dumb" people are incredibly shallow as well.
Well im done...later!

p.s.
I was the only one in my highschool that could play the solo to "fade to black"...but I never had that girl/ego/penis problem
lol.. just kidding(or am I???)
Later!

PonyOne

06-07-2003, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by chucklivesoninmyheart
LOL
The reason why metallica and so many other "nu-ish" corporate product bands dont write(like they actually write anything)complicated rhythms and solo's is to appeal to a much wider audience.Not everyone plays guitar or has a musical ear to appreciate complex music."Musically simple minded" people look for looks/popularity/a crowd/the band members themselves and lyrics to relate to.Its no coincidence that many "musically dumb" people are incredibly shallow as well.
Later!

This is a very good point... part of the reason 12 strings never caught on... personally I think they sound beautiful, but most non-musically-inclined people think they sound "gay." I almost punched a guy for saying that about mine.

Most people are content to listen to something like a rap or pop beat, where you have a 120bpm rythm, with three bass hits per bar, a little clicking noise and a little beeping noise and then every 4 bars you have a wiggidy wiggidy whack turntable scratch once. It's simple. That's why a lot of people who are really into rap, bass CD's, and pop can't listen to The Chemical Brothers or Crystal Method; because they have 13 tracks going simultaneously and things change so that if you listen to the first ten seconds and the last ten seconds they're totally different.

Honestly I don't think that solos need to be in every song for it to be good, or real rock, or anything like that... there are some songs where it just souldn't fit. But by the same token solos show off a guitarist's technical prowess, which isn't really a big deal to me, but, that means by default it's going to happen. They can also add a whole dimension to a song that it wouldn't have otherwise. I like solos. I like playing solos. I like making my own solos. I've never kicked myself for not knowing how to perfectly replicate the solo from X, Y, or Z song because I really haven't got any interest in playing other peoples' work.

I don't like Metallica because they sold out in the worst way: their new music sucks and has been constructed to try and steal some glory away from nu bands; I'm not the first person to say this but when I first heard the song i thought "hmm... someone's trying to be System Of A Down." The saddest thing to me is that most of these bands that they're trying to be now grew up listening to and were influenced by Metallica. And all this in pursuit of new fans... whilst alienating the MASSIVE and irrationally loyal fanbase that they have always had. Maybe it's time to accept that they aren't the kings of rock and they can't rule the world... their music doesn't appeal to everyone (me included)... so do what you do well and STOP F-CKING MAKING YOURSELF LOOK LIKE MORONS. And going totally against the underlying fundamentals of rock and going all corporate and sending lawsuit notices to die hard fans for downloading unreleased recordings of concerts didn't help either.

PS The E Shredder (is that E as in electronic? Like E-mail?) when you're trying to make a point to someone it's okay to use profanity but it helps people to take you seriously if you use punctuation. I don't know if you're just one of those people that gets really ticked off and just runs everything on, but, it makes your points a lot harder to take. I respect your opinion and all but that's your opinion. I stated mine and I know that there are people who won't agree with it... but what's the use of telling everyone on the forum they're a total retard? Don't think they're going to listen to the point you make, even with a Harvardian grammatical structure.

theeshredder

06-07-2003, 04:17 PM

first of all i aint in high school i dont know were you got that idea.the thing about wanting everyone to idolize me who said that dumb ****,and solo of fade to black personaly i think it sucks so why would i want to learn it.the comment about me have no ear how do u know that you dont even know me and your trying to judge my playing your so stupid thats just like a blind man judging how you look and i never said solos suck i said THERE GETTING TO A POINT WERE THEY ALL SOUND THE SAME everyone and the grandma is trying to be the next jimi but guess what they will never be.they buy books on his style or whoever they like and they play practicly the same **** people these days dont know how to improvise they just try to sound like there heros go out and buy the equipment there heros use anyway you just took my post the wrong way i guess and as for guitar playing it seems like you know a lil and thats good casue alot of ppl dont know the basics

theeshredder

06-07-2003, 04:31 PM

and about the differnt tuning thing standard tuning is just the blueprint of everything when you tune to something else the notes all change right.the notes that you are used to playing or in a different place and if you try to play something it will sound way off why because there diiferent notes scales are not the same are they no

Axl_Rose

06-07-2003, 04:33 PM

LOL - I thought you were a school kid too shredder! You just have that mentality, and a child like way of putting across your points.
Its not about songs needing guitar solos. Solos, good mid 8s, half-time sections, double time outros etc add variety and depth to songs.
The new metallica album is a a bunch of random riffs thrown together! It as tho every song is based on the chromatic scale. Its utterly awful!

theeshredder

06-07-2003, 04:37 PM

well im no big fan of them myself but i just like it becasue they didnt try to force they 80's out of them.they just picked up the guitar jammed out and recored it.thank god hammet doesnt solo.

TheTrooper

06-07-2003, 05:05 PM

Why do you guys keep arguing over this new album. I think we all know how much it sucks and how the songs are all just random riffs thrown together and so on. Just get over it. If you dont like it, Dont buy it! I know I hate it personally and I wish they would stick to their old style, but they are just trying to get on Mtv and make more money. I already expected the album to suck seeing as how load and reload sucked so I dont have a problem with the music but I have to say I dont think I am ever gonna get over that crazy looking indian bassist from suicidal tendencies. That guy is scary. Check out his lips when he plays he looks like a gorrila with braids.

theeshredder

06-07-2003, 05:09 PM

hahahahaha who know he played with ozzy to right

educatedfilm

06-07-2003, 07:47 PM

Right, calm it down poeple... he says with stalinite control..
Let's not let this forum slip into gutiar.com... please dont swear at people, share your oppinion, but dont get personal... OK?
Theeshredder: I actually agree with you about alternate tunnings, I wasn't really into them too much till i really started getting into some sonic youth, but they do DRAMATICALLY affect your style...
That said though, could you calm down a little? Guitar is not the be all and end all of everything, trust me.

I heard St' Anger the single, I thought i was kinda cool, I've never been a fan of metalica's song writing, but the guitar sound is very different, at one point it reminded me of "my plauge" by slipknot.. I cant honestly say i found the eighties anything more that cringe worthy for guitar music (that's a big generalisation i know)...
The problem with solos is that they become absoloutly paramount at the expense of the rest of the song... and genuinly dont understand guitarists who love bands who are poor songwriters at best, but can play your bloody bog standard 4/4 , 8/8 solo... but hardly any have listen to the truly surreal stuff on sitar (i've been lead to believe some of it is done in 5/3, my mind boggles, it's certainly something i'd quite like to try)...

I'm, really getting into PJ Harvey's stuff of late, I really like it, and it's about as realistically simple as you can get, and even she ventures out from the world of 4/4..

icecool

06-07-2003, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by educatedfilm
The problem with solos is that they become absoloutly paramount at the expense of the rest of the song... and genuinly dont understand guitarists who love bands who are poor songwriters at best, but can play your bloody bog standard 4/4 , 8/8 solo... but hardly any have listen to the truly surreal stuff on sitar (i've been lead to believe some of it is done in 5/3, my mind boggles, it's certainly something i'd quite like to try)...

This is stupid. 'Bloody bog standard 4/4?' What the heck is that supposed to mean?! Some of the most influential and impressive solos are written in 4/4 time.

5/3?! Your mind boggles?! Is this a wind-up? That isn't such a crazy time signature!

Time signatures aren't what solos are about anyway man, and I think most musicians would take offense to you calling any solo in 4/4 'bog standard'.

PonyOne

06-08-2003, 02:41 AM

lighten up please

can't we all just use our brains...

Axl_Rose

06-08-2003, 07:19 AM

Originally posted by TheTrooper
Why do you guys keep arguing over this new album.

Erm.. because of freedom of speech, if you dont wana hear it start another post on something else!

Why do people hate the 80s!! The finest bands had their finest albums in the 80s!!! Guns, Aerosmith, U2, REM, ... theres more!

Also LOL to "guitar.com".. whats the name of this site? Arent Metallica meant to be a guitar band? Is it too much to ask for decent guitaring in their albums!! Bottom line is my 4-track has better riffs n ideas on it than that St Anger album!!! And im not alone on that one!!

Pantallica1

06-09-2003, 02:41 AM

I have yet to hear any of Metallica's new album and I doubt I will buy it. The fact is, I hate when people call them sellouts. So what if they "sold out". I would bet any amount of money that 95% of you would do the exact same thing. If a big record company offered your band a contract, huge amounts of money, just for you to change your style a bit, I bet many of you would do it.

Any musician or band changes their sound over time. Metallica is old, they've been around 20 plus years. Of course over that time frame their sound is going to change as they mature as musicians. Do I think they suck now, yes. But that's besides the point. I stopped listening after the release of the black album. But if I were put in their shoes I would've done the same thing. It's the old adage, the rich only want to get richer. And that's just what they did. I don't really think they tried to get onto MTV and "sell out," I think that everyone started to change their attitude about that type of music. And it continues to this day. 15 years ago, MTV would have never even dared to play System of a Down. Now you can turn on TRL and see them on the countdown. Did System of a Down sell out, or have people accepted the fact that the public likes that kind of music? I think it's the latter. Once the public started to accept them, it began to spread from their hardcore fans (Kill 'em All) to people jumping on the band wagon (Black Album, in specific, "Enter Sandman"). So to call them "sell outs" is just ignorant.

About that "theeshredder" dude, people try to be like their "heroes" because that's usually what inspires people to pick up a guitar. There is nothing wrong with trying to imitate a legend, that's how different styles are born. You probably picked up a guitar after listening to different songs and deciding "Hey that would be cool if I could play that" and all of the sudden you're playing guitar for 10 or 15 years.

Ahh well....life goes on...

SLY

06-09-2003, 12:05 PM

Pantallica1 - nice post dude.

The main problem I see in "St Anger" album specificaly is that Metallica is kinda following the trends instead of creating them as they used to do ... Each album from Metallica sounded very unique at it's time , even Load and Reload , but now I don't see much difference between "St Anger" and other Nu Metal stuff.

theeshredder

06-10-2003, 02:17 AM

i agree with you alot pantellica.that is alomost the same point i have tried to prove in the past about ppl saying bands are sell outs.just because bands gain a huge fan base and everyone starts reconizing them doesnt mean there sell outs,for instance would you ppl say that jimi hendrix was a sell out becasue of his popularity? srv,black sabbath?i didnt think.dont get me wrong though there are bands that are major sellouts linkin park,cannible corpse,immortol for examples

icecool

06-10-2003, 02:53 AM

theeshredder, I'm not being harsh here, but why is there never any punctuation in your replys? And why are phrases constantly cut in half?

Not trying to insult you, it's just a bit odd and and makes reading your posts a bit annoying.

theeshredder

06-10-2003, 02:56 AM

i do.It just TO 'see YOU ppl :THAT CONSTINLY BITCH \ about my puncuation get mad and post about it rather than the TOPIC

06-10-2003, 10:51 AM

i saw the new metallica video on TV, it had no balls anywhere and they played in a prison. i thought it sucked. there wasn't even a solo.

PonyOne

06-10-2003, 10:53 AM

Popularity has nothing to do with popularity. There are plenty of bands who haven't let popularity change their music.

Selling out has nothing to do with fans and everything to do with the artists. Jimi and SRV got bigger post mortem (after they died) so that's a moot point. Most of the Jimi fans out there weren't even born when he died, and most SRV fans were in lower grade school or diapers when he died.

I've posted it probably 300 or so times here and I'll post it again for everyone's benefiet. My definition of a sellout: someone who changes the sound of their music for no artistic purposes: the sole reason being to reach a bigger audience and sell more CD's. By this definition there are unsigned bands across America who are guilty: the guys who have been trying for 2-3 years and haven't got signed, so they go "alright guys we need to change our sound" and listen to the top 10 rock songs on the radio and then try to combine QOTSA rythms with Audioslave leads and SOAD choruses in the hopes more people will pay attention to them, all the while leaving the good sh!t on the floor of the bassist's bedroom. Selling out is taking the art and poking it in the eye, it's taking what makes music interesting and good to listen to and throwing it down the side of the mountain into the trash heap in favor standing there with your chest puffed out, looking cool/tough/sexy. Throwing the diamonds away because more people have cubic ziconias.

It's pimping out your art because you want money. If you want money go put on a shirt and tie and learn how to crunch numbers. Because until you become a music teacher, or your band gets signed, cuts a CD, tours, and you sell enough copies to pay back the record company or something along those lines, being a musician doesn't pay that well. If you want a BMW and a mansion and beautiful women then your chances are better in the stock market. I'm a mortgage broker by day; it pays damn well. I'm a musician. I'd rather do something during the days that is disposable than throw away my music, which is more sacred to me than any other facet of my personality. To go and play Linkin Park-like tunes to try and get signed is sacreligious.

Metallica has been going down since the Black album, and when I heard St. Anger it made me realize how far these guys have tanked. There is no Metallica whatsoever left in that song. The only thing I can think of is a vague, vague, vague similarity to "Until It Speaks" in the verses. Then the chorus comes on and I picture Daron Malakian gyrating around with no shirt on.

Pantallica1

06-10-2003, 01:48 PM

PonyOne, I understand what you are saying about a lot of things. I agree totally that Metallica has been on the fall since the Black Album, but as I said before, they got old. When you grow up your styles change, and I think that's what happened to them. I think that the record companies have a lot to do with the way music is today. I'm sure there was immense pressure on them because they weren't a "radio friendly" band. That's what most companies want. I'm speaking out of experience here because my brother's band is in the midst of this same dilemma. They play an aggressive metal type of music and were on the verge of being signed by a couple different labels. When you spend your whole life wanting to succeed in something you will try to do whatever it takes to get there. My brother's band has started changing their sound a little bit to try to fit into what the record companies are looking for. That doesn't make them sellouts. The music they write is still their work. They work hard at it.

chucklivesoninmyheart

06-10-2003, 09:46 PM

First off...when did immortal sell out?
second...is it a coincidence that bands that are considerd sellouts suck?Theres less emphasis on the music so its comprehendable to non-musicians..which means a bigger consumer audience...which means more money in the end..period.Death for example got better with each passing record.They defined and improved there unique sound with age.They didnt slack off,pop some geritols and ease back over time.As a musician your not supposed to get worse with age!And 95% of musicians dont sellout...there wouldnt be "underground" if they did.The formula has been the same since the fifties...create hooks with lyrics people can relate/attach to.It sells records to a market of simple people(musically anyway).Metallica's "riding" on past sucsess...as with kiss...and the rolling stones.The new bands hook with the emotional scheme as well.Sex appeal,shock value,relation to common problems and the classic "falling domino's" or "band wagon" tactic.Everyone forgets who's behind these bands.Big record companies with "marketing" in mind.I care about MUSICIANSHIP.95% of musicians and bands care about MUSICIANSHIP.I'm sick of seeing people trying to compremise the truth.I'm sick of seeing fake depressed "individual" teenagers conforming to whats big,cool or in.Lastly..I'm sick of the music INDUSTRY and the bands/product taking advantage of peoples lack of knowlege and teenagers emotional problems.
I went through it myself(jumping on the bandwagon cause it was "in" and my friends liked it too)
well my rants done
later! \m/

theeshredder

06-10-2003, 11:40 PM

of course ppl want to here lyrics they can relate to its better than some swedish death metal band singing about how satan is coming and his minions are going to take over the world and **** about vampires and goblins

Pantallica1

06-11-2003, 12:55 AM

Hey chuck, I never said people stop caring about "musicianship." I just said that if people were offered something like that, most would take it. Simple fact. That's the American way, get rich quick, without working hard at it. That's why there's lawsuits over stupid stuff everyday.

I agree with you that some bands get better with age, but Metallica isn't one of them. There are plenty of bands that just suck when they get older. There isn't anything wrong with that, and that doesn't make them sellouts, that just makes them not good at what they used to be good at.

We can all sit here and say, Metallica sucks now, they should play like they used too. But you can compare Kill 'em All to Master of Puppets and see a huge change between those albums. Does that mean that they were selling out because their sound changed? No, just because the change between And Justice for all... and St. Anger is a change for the worse (not for the better like previous albums, up to the Black Album I might add), people want to say they're selling out.

Ah well...

metalisbest

06-11-2003, 05:55 PM

Well you must not listen to many death metal bands then.

Raskolnikov

06-11-2003, 09:09 PM

If Metallica's new stuff is "more accessable and radio friendly," why has The Black Album sold more copies than every record they've done since combined? And didn't Lars joining the lawsuit against Napster dry up a very large section of their potential fan base?

I never cared for Metallica, and I doubt I ever will, but the last thing I'll do is call them "sellouts."

Raskolnikov

06-11-2003, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by metalisbest
Well you must not listen to many death metal bands then.
Most Death Metal is about pure carnage, not neccessarily Satan, Satanism or vampires. Those subjects are generally addressed by BM bands.

SLY

06-11-2003, 09:15 PM

Psycho kinda lyrics generally sux , wether it's black,doom,death or whatever.

Raskolnikov

06-11-2003, 09:19 PM

Originally posted by SLY
Psycho kinda lyrics generally sux , wether it's black,doom,death or whatever.
The key to enjoying Death and Black Metal is to enjoy the music and laugh at the vocals.

For me anyway. Some people however do like the lyrical "asthetics" of the genres.

SLY

06-11-2003, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by Raskolnikov
Some people however do like the lyrical "asthetics" of the genres.

Some of my friends are realy into these childish-horror lyrics (and vocaling !!) , I just feel sorry for 'em.

chucklivesoninmyheart

06-12-2003, 08:10 PM

heheh
If anyone has ever listened to death before they should know the lyrics in fact have more to do with life(strangley I know).And black metal bands..besides dark funeral and some others..things arnt satan,satan,satan!A large majority tell decent storys,fantasy's or the like.Termed as "epic" metal.I dont see anything wrong with "gore" lyrics.If people could get past stereotypes they would find the intelligent lyrical compositions without shunning bands of before hearing them.Its alot better than "I feel angry,I feel sad,I'm all alone,my girlfriend left me,everyone hates me,hey,hey,hey,yeeaahhh!"
cliche lyrics.Point is..."Dont throw out the corn if you havnt tasted the cream of the crop".Please dont bother calling me a hipocrite for not listening to "the cream of the crop" as Ive painfully listened to alot of radio garbage with an open mind(along with alot of underground garbage).
Lastly...the black album sold well becuase the songs WERE radio friendly(by that I also mean catchy)...but Ive always herd stuff off load e.c.t(especially s and m album)on the radio..one station has mettalica blocks everyday with stuff post black album.Why hasnt there following albums sold so well?Cause niether are the tunes well written(with exeptions)but they didnt "hook" people.That must mean there not sellouts right?No...Like I said before(on another reply)there riding on there past.That makes them far worse sellouts to attempt to "ride" old glory.As for losing fans during the whole napster thing....HHMMMMM..money over fans?has SELLOUT written all over it.
later! \m/

Raskolnikov

06-12-2003, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by chucklivesoninmyheart
Lastly...the black album sold well becuase the songs WERE radio friendly(by that I also mean catchy)...but Ive always herd stuff off load e.c.t(especially s and m album)on the radio..one station has mettalica blocks everyday with stuff post black album.Why hasnt there following albums sold so well?Cause niether are the tunes well written(with exeptions)but they didnt "hook" people.That must mean there not sellouts right?No...Like I said before(on another reply)there riding on there past.That makes them far worse sellouts to attempt to "ride" old glory.As for losing fans during the whole napster thing....HHMMMMM..money over fans?has SELLOUT written all over it.
later! \m/
Wrong.

It was incredibly obvious to everybody with even half a brain that attempting to shut down or curb Napter would piss A LOT of people off. Pissed off people DO NOT buy your records, but more importantly, they don't go to your shows and/or buy your merch. That's where bands make their money, not record sales.

Artists should have a right to say "no, you can't have my music for free" and have that respected. Napster took that decision out of the artist's hands, so I respect Lars' stance on the issue. It's actually about the only thing I respect about him.

I think turning a blind eye to Napster and trying to replicate their old material time and time again ::coughAC/DCcough:: because it would make people happy (and it would have) would have been far more "selloutish" than just about everything Metallica has done since The Black Album. All they've done since then is tick people off, they knew they would, and they did it anyway.

Now lets look at the other side of the coin where we find Sugar Ray, who not only changed their sound to something popular, but now let the record company write their music. That's selling out.

I state again: I am not nor have I ever been a fan of Metallica.

[Edited by Raskolnikov on 06-12-2003 at 07:59 PM]

Pantallica1

06-13-2003, 12:22 AM

I agree with Ras.

It's not just money over fans either. Let's see, if your job was to make music and work hard at it wouldn't you want to be compensated for your money spent, your hard work, and time invested? I know you probably wouldn't want to do your job for free, I know I wouldn't. I'm a mechanic and I wouldn't go to work for free and fix people's cars everyday for free. That's just plain ignorant.

So what if they're millionaires. It's still their money that they have earned. If you worked hard and made millions of dollars, you wouldn't just one day say, "Well I have millions of dollars, so I can just do everything for free now." Hell no.

If a customer comes in and needs $500 dollars worth of work done, I'm not going to say, "Oh, you're a fan of the franchise I work for, man, in that case, I'll fix it for free." I don't think so. It's not always about money, it's just about being rewarded with hard work.

chucklivesoninmyheart

06-13-2003, 09:41 PM

I hate to say it but I think this issue would come down to an argument over share/music programs like napster and weather its right or wrong.

So I will give everyone the benefit of the doubt
Later! \m/

theeshredder

06-13-2003, 09:49 PM

**** i wouldnt want ppl downloading my music either why even bother making a record then just tour and hand out demos

Andrew Sa

06-15-2003, 03:36 PM

As with all arguments...there are two sides.
First off...cds ( original ) are getting so damn expensive that it is almost acceptable to copy them.
But the more piracy, the higher the price of cds so as to make up for money lost due to piracy.
its your own call.
As for St. Anger. what a **** album. I am sorry and highly embarrased to say I bought it as soon as it came out. Lars Ulrich must fix his snare...or he should go and play sessions for punk bands in ****ty studios. and where have all the excellent solos gone? most of the guitaring is tinny and country-sounding...definately their worst album yet...and I love Metallica and own every other album...but st anger is just dissapointing.

msinia

06-15-2003, 05:07 PM

Damn, Am I the only one here who does like the Album?
Its completely different from the old metallica, and completely different from the new metallica, and I think it goes beyond the "Ohh no solos" whinning. It has some interesting things, it has power, and it goes against the mainstream, specially from the way the album sounds.
I like it.

bigmarty

06-15-2003, 11:46 PM

ok well then I'm the 2nd guy who likes St Anger.I'll admit it caught me off guard with no solos in there(can't wait to read Kirk in the guitar mags about why there were no solos?) and I can live without the trash can lid snare sound that Lars uses as well but to me it's better then load and reload and thrown in the s&m one as well.I give them credit for taking a chance with this one because I think if they did another load /reload type record the public would have really crucified them for not giving what the fans wanted a kind of a throwback to their old days with a different sound( ie:low tuning)and besides how many of you who bought the dam cd/dvd got it just to get the code so you can hear the old stuff at their website????It's an interesting package, maybe this is their way of trying to get some of the fans back after the Napster lawsuit.But to each his own on this cd and I like it.

msinia

06-24-2003, 03:29 PM

hehe anyone else??

metalisbest

06-24-2003, 04:36 PM

What I don't understand is all the reviews that I have read by magazines and websites all agree that the album is great and what they have been waiting for them to do. Why?

PonyOne

06-24-2003, 07:40 PM

see the prob to me is that it doesn't actually go against the mainstream. they're trying to take every piece of the rock mainstream and put it all into one song (i haven't listened to the rest of the CD yet, so I'm solely going off St. Anger: the song)

Every time it comes on the radio, I think "System Of A Down." That intro is ripped straight off Toxicity. Listen to "psycho." Perilously similar. There's nothing wrong with taking artistic liberties, or using a song for inspiration. I have issues with people ripping off other peoples' work; Godsmack's new single, it sounds like a rehash of their old song, Voodoo, except now sully is trying to sound (vocally) like Metallica rather than Alice In Chains. Maybe he heard that AIC ripoff by Taproot and was like "aw crap, someone else is doing it, and doing it BETTER... let's see what else is in my CD changer... here we go... Metal-licka. Hm. Odd name. Must be like Timbaland."

So, to regroup, to me the song is not only mainstream, it is a perfect microcosm of the mainstream: take some contemporary stuff that works, splice it up, throw it out on the street, and sucker people who either love the band's old stuff or who have no musical ear whatsoever into buying it and trying to justify it as "the only real rock band going down new musical avenues."

The song Acorns on the new White Stripes CD is harder than the new Metallica. To quote Pelle Almqvist & Nicholaus Arson from the Hives, Guitar World, 9/02: "When we were younger and discovered the Sonics, we discovered that music from 1965 could be angrier and have a harder edge than, like, death metal. Because most of what makes that music sound dangerous is sound effects, really. If you can have a country guitar part and make it sound like you're the most dangerous man on the planet then you're getting somewhere. But if you have a detuned seven string guitar and a bunch of blazing amps, it's not really that hard - you just hit a string and it grumbles. It's cheating! It should be distorting because the amp doesn't hold up to the volume and energy going through it. That's how guitarists did it originally. Nowadays it's just a sound and anyone can get it. Back then you had to work at it, even if it meant ripping the speaker."

Metallica isn't doing anything interested at all. They're just doing what a bunch of kids who grew up idolizing them are doing, and they're doing it badly. What would you think if Keith Richards picked up an ESP and started trying to play Mudvayne-like stuff?

TheTrooper

06-24-2003, 07:59 PM

Hey guys this thread is getting prretty damn annoying. Just get over it. The new album SUCKS! Its horrible they just want to make money and they are trying to appeal to a new crowd. If you were them yo would probably be doing it to. Anyway just get over the fact that Metallica stinks now

msinia

06-24-2003, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by TheTrooper
Hey guys this thread is getting prretty damn annoying. Just get over it. The new album SUCKS! Its horrible they just want to make money and they are trying to appeal to a new crowd. If you were them yo would probably be doing it to. Anyway just get over the fact that Metallica stinks now

the new album doesn't suck, and certainly it doesn't because you say so. There are a lot of people that like it and a lot that hate it.

Gainer

06-25-2003, 08:44 PM

I like the new album, it is very different but it is Metallica.

We needed a good Metal album.

metalisbest

06-25-2003, 11:58 PM

Thats why Nothingface came out with a new album.

Q12321

06-26-2003, 12:43 PM

i gotta tell ya, some of the st. anger album is ok, but overall, it blows.

Bad Points:

1. NO SOLOS! WTF?
2. All songs are in drop C tuning. (Im pretty sure) One of the reasons I liked Metallica so much is because they didnt drop down to nu metal technique, such as no solos and in really low tunings. I liked them because their sh*t sounded good in standerd tuning, or a half-step down. Drop C tuning, wtf were they thinking?
3. The lyrics REALLY SUCK! There isn't any lyrics that actually make any sence like any other metallica songs. Wanna hear baddly written lyrics, listin to mainly St. Anger (repeated lyrics), Purify (What the hell is this?), and Some kinda monster (good song, bad lyrics.)
4. Lars new snare sounds highly shi*ty. He doesnt use the really big drum set as he used to, the drums he has now are the same size as mine.

Good Things:
1. It is a new Metallica album, come on.
2. Some songs are structered well, and sound good, like The Unnamed Feeling, which I think is the best song on the album.

Q12321

06-26-2003, 12:46 PM

yeah, The Unnamed Feeling is DEFINATLY the best song on the album.

finished

06-26-2003, 07:19 PM

i like some of the songs on the new album,its different and kinda cool. its not their best though. if the album does not sell 2 million records will lar's blame it on share ware and not the product? $18 for 8 to 9 average songs is what is hurting them, not shareware. if it's a good CD im going to buy it.. for my collection.... i have replaced for all... and the black album a few times each. make good music and people will buy it. make crap and people will burn it. .... my 2cents

finished

06-27-2003, 03:37 AM

"small correction" $24 for music and dvd... usually at tower of records.... but it could be on sell for $18 i guess.

metalisbest

06-27-2003, 10:33 AM

Why would you go to Tower to buy a cd? I go to a independent record store called Manifest, and St. Anger is 16.00 and when it first came out they had it for 12.99.

PonyOne

06-27-2003, 03:40 PM

The music industry blames file sharing for its losses... i blame the fact that there's more crappy, bland music out there than there has been in quite some time clogging the airwaves across the US.

Back in the 60's, 80's, and even in the mid 90's, every record company was looking for "the next big thing." Now they don't really care as long as it makes some sort of money. Also, there's that issue of the economy tanking under our financial genius president. Could it be that back in '98 when the economy was good people could afford to spend some of their earnings on a $13 CD, and now, nobody is making money and millions don't have jobs, and CD's cost $18?

St. Anger may have a DVD and live tracks, but the White Stripes CD was $18, no bonuses. If you go to a record store and look at the CD's, most of them, regardless of when they were made, cost between $15 and $20.