New Metallica Album

Alright fellow metalheads I got somthing for you to ponder. As a die hard Metallica fan it is an understatement to say I was dissappointed in St. Anger, actually in almost everything since The Black Album. Lately I've been wondering, "will Metallica put out another album" so if anyone knows anything let me know...the next question is what will it sound like? I don't think they can afford another St. Anger, if they do another album its gonna have to be harder, faster, and a hell of a lot more old school. Opinions welcome.

I think that the biggest thing effecting the bands coolness (and this is only an assumption) is that JAmes isn't capable of laying down those angery, dead serious, Im so pissed off that im going to "kill em all" vocals that he did on the first 3 albums. The best example of this sound that I am talking about occurs on the album Master of Puppets. Mabey its due to vocal chord damage, or also I sometimes think that it could be due to the regretable loss of the bass player Cliff Burton. With Jason Newstead replacing him as a bass player the band lost a certain amount of accuracy in regard to technique. With that said, nothing need to be said about whoever the new guy is on bass now.

I was dissapointed with Load, but with it following Black this was to be expected. I stopped buying their cds with the release of Reload. Considering this, St. Anger wasn't a dissapointment to me personally; based off of the bands trend to release an album worst then the one they had released before it since the black album. One positive thing that I do have to say is that if you can ignore the drum sound (if thats one thing you don't like about the album) is that the drumming is really great.

I think that Metallica will continue to release more albums. That for each of those albums every new release will be worst then the last one.

As for the Napster incident; for a legendary band to confront one of the best marketing devices ever employeed in the music industry and then to destroy it is ludicris. By their greed, Metallica has seriously compramised any of our chances as artists to get noticed by the industry. I have bought all of the Metallica albums from Kill em All to Black on casette and CD as well (thats right, I bought all of them twice.) I've been to 4 of their concerts. I bought their guitar tabs books, stickers, T shirts, ect..., and this is how they do me? Thanks alot Lars. You F***** D*** HEAD :mad: :mad: :mad:

You know you might have something with the whole Cliff thing...I honestly believe that if Cliff was still alive then Metallica would still be playing heavy speed metal type stuff...I mean he was really their grounding influence in that area. I understand that they picked up some new fans, but it can't be enough to replace all the disgruntled hardcore fans. I own every album but St. Anger...which I refuse to buy...in part because that put it in that little
$h!tty cardboard case...I'm hardcore man I love metallica, I have all my cd cases in a display at home, but that little cardboard case would f*** it up...not to mention I don't want that music in my CD case. Unless I get in a weird mood I only listen to Kill 'em All, Ride the Lightning, Master of Puppets, ...And Justice for All, and The Black Album...only if there is like one song I want to hear will I put in Load or Re-Load. I also love Garage Inc. that $h!t goes hard man, but again most of it is heavy and fast. I don't know...I hope they won't let their Hardcore fans down with the next one.

Originally Posted by: rockonmanAlright fellow metalheads I got somthing for you to ponder. As a die hard Metallica fan it is an understatement to say I was dissappointed in St. Anger, actually in almost everything since The Black Album. Lately I've been wondering, "will Metallica put out another album" so if anyone knows anything let me know...the next question is what will it sound like? I don't think they can afford another St. Anger, if they do another album its gonna have to be harder, faster, and a hell of a lot more old school. Opinions welcome.

i think they will have another St. Anger cause it won a grammy for best metal album

Originally Posted by: HambergThanks alot Lars. You F***** D*** HEAD :mad: :mad: :mad:

How exactly did the demise of Napster affect you?

Ok, I will say it again. Napster was one of the best promotional devices that the industry has ever seen.

Originally Posted by: HambergWith Jason Newstead replacing him as a bass player the band lost a certain amount of accuracy in regard to technique.[/quote]
I'm not sure if you're trying to say Newstead was the problem or not, but I think he gets a lot of flack he really doesn't deserve.

It doesn't take a lot of investigation to see that not only was he almost totally shut out of the songwriting process, but also that his side projects tended to be much more "Metal" than what Metallica is putting out these days.



[QUOTE=Hamberg]As for the Napster incident; for a legendary band to confront one of the best marketing devices ever employeed in the music industry and then to destroy it is ludicris. By their greed, Metallica has seriously compramised any of our chances as artists to get noticed by the industry. I have bought all of the Metallica albums from Kill em All to Black on casette and CD as well (thats right, I bought all of them twice.) I've been to 4 of their concerts. I bought their guitar tabs books, stickers, T shirts, ect..., and this is how they do me? Thanks alot Lars. You F***** D*** HEAD :mad: :mad: :mad:

1). No matter how good or bad it may have been for artists, Napster was illegal.

2). Lars didn't file the law suit, he joined it. Take that how you will but as an enterprise, Napster was going down no matter what.

3). If mp3 sharing increases record sales (which, by the way, bands make very little money from), how could Lars joining the suit be considered greed?

4). Mp3 sharing hasn't gone anywhere or even slowed -- what has really been taking away from you?

Yea im kinda tired of Metallica fans complaining cause they can't get their free music.

I mean, if they like the band soooooo much, then support them by pruchasing their CD's

This is to fans in general, not to you Hamburg...FYI

Originally Posted by: RaskolnikovI'm not sure if you're trying to say Newstead was the problem or not, but I think he gets a lot of flack he really doesn't deserve.

It doesn't take a lot of investigation to see that not only was he almost totally shut out of the songwriting process, but also that his side projects tended to be much more "Metal" than what Metallica is putting out these days.




1). No matter how good or bad it may have been for artists, Napster was illegal.

2). Lars didn't file the law suit, he joined it. Take that how you will but as an enterprise, Napster was going down no matter what.

3). If mp3 sharing increases record sales (which, by the way, bands make very little money from), how could Lars joining the suit be considered greed?
4). Mp3 sharing hasn't gone anywhere or even slowed -- what has really been taking away from you?

I am aware that bands make most of their money from shows, merchandise, or endorsements. The point is, is that why shut it down when little money is lost? By keeping napster running the bands were making a good will investment; hopping that they would get more exposure. In turn people who really liked the band would buy your all of your releases. In comparison, the radio, someone hears a song that they like from the band and then buys your CD and are dissapointed with the rest of it. They then tell others that the CD sucks and not to buy it. I'm sorry if you don't see it my way but I did go to college for two years as a finance major, and shuting down Napster really does appear to be the stupidest thing that The music industry has ever dealt with.

Also I want to add that I personally did not use Napster very much before it was deemed illegal. My friends had like a 1000 songs on their PCs. I had like 2.
Of the songs they downloaded if they really liked the band they ended up buying the CD anyways. Napster was just a better version of the radio man.

Metallica should quit and cut their loses...they can't be redeemed(to me at least).We will alway's have everything up to '...and justice for all' as musical treasures(up to 'the black album' for some people)...moment of silence...

Its not like you still can't get free music to sample,but whats the point of downloading a bands entire discography in a grainy/quality lacking format?

I NEVER buy a cd without hearing a few tracks,but now most bands offer the tracks publicly to hear(on their website or their labels site),so large P2P networks(like napster)aren't needed for music really.Its still good for porn though I guess :D

Real fans usually buy cds, from my experience at least.
I think its really dumb that musicians in the USA cry about p2p file sharing networks, especially when we're talking about a band like metallica with all the merchandise they sell besides cd's.
Just watch some mtv cribs and you'll understand what im talking about..

Originally Posted by: Hamberg...and shuting down Napster really does appear to be the stupidest thing that The music industry has ever dealt with.

The operating word here is "appear". Nothing has changed since Napster was taken down.(except that now you have the possibility to download legally. ie iTunes)
P2P software still exists, illegal downloading of music still occurs,... In other words, bands still have plenty of choices when it comes to distributing their music for free on the internet, if they choose to use it as a marketing strategy...

Illegal downloading of music isn't a black and white situation, it probably has its benefits, and it probably has its negative side, but anyone who claims to know which side of the scale carries the biggest weight is talking out of their ass. There are too many factors to consider that make it impossible to know the effect illegal downloading exactly has on the music industry.

Originally Posted by: HambergThe point is, is that why shut it down when little money is lost?[/QUOTE]
What about the individual artist's right to decide (for better or worse) what to share and what not?

Who are you to take that away?


I'm sitting right here with all of my old band's tracks up on LimeWire. A friend of mine has them hosted on Kazaa. I would rather my music be heard for free than not heard at all, but that choice belongs to myself, my drummer, and my guitarist and nobody else.




[QUOTE=Zeppelin]I think its really dumb that musicians in the USA cry about p2p file sharing networks, especially when we're talking about a band like metallica with all the merchandise they sell besides cd's.
Just watch some mtv cribs and you'll understand what im talking about..

If you think MTV's Cribs is representative of musicians in the US, you are very sadly mistaken.

Originally Posted by: SPLThe operating word here is "appear". Nothing has changed since Napster was taken down.(except that now you have the possibility to download legally. ie iTunes)
P2P software still exists, illegal downloading of music still occurs,... In other words, bands still have plenty of choices when it comes to distributing their music for free on the internet, if they choose to use it as a marketing strategy...

Illegal downloading of music isn't a black and white situation, it probably has its benefits, and it probably has its negative side, but anyone who claims to know which side of the scale carries the biggest weight is talking out of their ass. There are too many factors to consider that make it impossible to know the effect illegal downloading exactly has on the music industry.

I might be talking out of my ass, but its seems like common sense to me that unlimited exposure is far more valuable then the royality of some cd sales (whats the royalty percentage? 10%?)

Originally Posted by: chucklivesoninmyheartMetallica should quit and cut their loses...they can't be redeemed(to me at least).We will alway's have everything up to '...and justice for all' as musical treasures(up to 'the black album' for some people)...moment of silence...

Its not like you still can't get free music to sample,but whats the point of downloading a bands entire discography in a grainy/quality lacking format?

I NEVER buy a cd without hearing a few tracks,but now most bands offer the tracks publicly to hear(on their website or their labels site),so large P2P networks(like napster)aren't needed for music really.Its still good for porn though I guess :D

Whos going to come to your website and d/l your music if nobody knows who you are?

Not to take away from your guys' argument, but your gettin away from the question I asked. Does anyone know anything about a new album, and what do you think it will sound like.

Originally Posted by: rockonmanNot to take away from your guys' argument, but your gettin away from the question I asked. Does anyone know anything about a new album, and what do you think it will sound like.

In my opinion, St. Anger was garbage, and it followed the trend that Metallica has had lately of putting out crappy albums. And since bands rarely rebound from that trend, I'm gonna say it'll sound as bad if not worse than St. Anger. And no, i havent heard anything about a new album.

Thanx for gettin back to the point man.

to Hamberg...to find these 'diamonds in the rough' you have to search a little.Good music will not always just fall on your lap through word of mouth,T.V,or the radio.Go to metal www.metal-observer.com to look through the enormous amount of bands you may or may not have heard of.Read some reviews,check a sound byte if available and do more searching.

It apply's to any genre really.There are tons of great bands(often in a sea of crap)to find for whatever music you like.

I think their new albums name is "Learn to Burn"