New Metallica Material?

merlinsmerryman

Check out http://www.allmetallica.com/news.php?id=320. Not sure myself that if they are working on new material would they really play it during a sound-check?

Whiskeyjack

That's the biggest pile of horse**** I've ever heard.They were just jamming.Loads of band do that during soundcheck.

However I have heard news of them going back to the studio soon enough.

senordingdong

Can't wait(!)

Arucard

whiskeyjack make sense

merlinsmerryman

Before I get slated any more I apologise was only tryin to be a little funny, sorry(I know they were only jammin). Lot of rumours going around that Rick Rubin will produce the new album.

senordingdong

Instead of Bum Buddie Bob Rock?
Not likely.

Doctor J

Eazzy earns a holiday. PM me in two weeks to lift the ban.

Let's keep it civil, please folks.

dimerocks

apparently bob rock is busy next year with motley crué and cant do the metallica album so go the rumours.

SouperComputer

apparently bob rock is busy next year with motley crué and cant do the metallica album so go the rumours.

Thats the best news ive heard in 15 years!

[edit] I hope none if what's in the video is put on al album. Sounds like crap! [/edit]

mickymg2003

Are they not in the middle of recording the album already. They Took a Break before xmas. Are they back recording yet?

projectmayhem

tbh i'm surprised at people's optimism about this band now. they've released utter muck for a decade or so and everyone's waiting for ride the lightning pt.II

the band isn't even a band anymore. they're employee's of metallica inc. i lost all hope in them after watching some kind of monster. all they're good for is a live show where they play 2 new songs at maximum and focus on the old stuff for 2 hours

It wasn't me!

Wouldn't mind hearing the old stuff if they still had their chops about them to be honest.

merlinsmerryman

mickymg2003 wrote:

Are they not in the middle of recording the album already. They Took a Break before xmas. Are they back recording yet?

Only details released are that they are in the studio Rehearsing in preparation for the new album. No details if anything has been recorded yet.

Whiskeyjack

merlinsmerryman wrote:

Only details released are that they are in the studio Rehearsing in preparation for the new album. No details if anything has been recorded yet.

It'll either be the best album since the black album or another pile of **** like St. Anger.

gizmo

projectmayhem wrote:

tbh i'm surprised at people's optimism about this band now. they've released utter muck for a decade or so and everyone's waiting for ride the lightning pt.II

Wouldnt we be waiting for Master Of Puppets Pt. II more?

senordingdong

projectmayhem wrote:

tbh i'm surprised at people's optimism about this band now. they've released utter muck for a decade or so and everyone's waiting for ride the lightning pt.II

Wise men learn from their mistakes.
Let's hope they take the fans criticism well and and not make the same mistakes aghain.

mayordenis

its their last chance to salvage their career in my opinion,
as a fan of pretty old metal (mostly power metal and the likes, but a little trash) i think the majority of metallica fans know that st. Anger was a piece of ****,
but alot will give them the benefit of the doubt and hope that with a decent producer and maybe some effort and standard tuning and maybe even a real drum set they might be able to recreate something close to their brilliance of old.

pbsuxok1znja4r

senordingdong wrote:

Wise men learn from their mistakes.
Let's hope they take the fans criticism well and and not make the same mistakes aghain.

Yeah wise men learn from their mistakes, but not from their fans' criticisms. Metallica produced more than a few goddamn amazing albums by sticking to their guns and having faith in their own personal sense of what sounds good. 99% of Metallica's fans couldn't write a decent song to save their lives. Where would Metallica be if they just pandered to their ungrateful audience and produced whatever they theought the "fans" wanted to hear? Then they would cease to really be a band.

Metallica's artistic integrity remains entirely intact, IMO. St Anger may be my least favourite Metallica album, but that album proves that Metallica write what they write for themselves and not for their 'fans'. Hell, they've been proving that since Load. So just get used to the idea that they don't f*cking care what kind of music you think they should write.

Doctor J

scouser.tommy wrote:

Metallica's artistic integrity remains entirely intact, IMO.

I draw your attention to the scene in the documentary where Bob Rock and Lars are telling Kirk that there won't be any guitar solos on the album because they're dated and not in keeping with the trend of the time, which was downtuned riffs and no solos. Correctly, Kirk points out that following the current trend would date the album to that point in time yet folds like piece of paper and does what he's told like a good puppet.

That's not artistic integrity :v:

pbsuxok1znja4r

Doctor J wrote:

I draw your attention to the scene in the documentary where Bob Rock and Lars are telling Kirk that there won't be any guitar solos on the album because they're dated and not in keeping with the trend of the time, which was downtuned riffs and no solos. Correctly, Kirk points out that following the current trend would date the album to that point in time yet folds like piece of paper and does what he's told like a good puppet.

That's not artistic integrity :v:

They didn't specifically mention "downtuned riffs" once.
Yeah, so they decided to forgo the solos. Probably a mistake. But you have to remember that there are two extremes to which they could have veered. Personally I think the kind of fast, almost shred-like solos that can be heard on their 80's material will always be more "dated" than not having solos could be.

Not playing solos does not date their music to any period. Solo-less heavy guitar music has been around for decades. Initially, I - like you - thought Kirk was correct in saying that not playing 'em dates it to that period. But it doesn't. He's wrong. The guitar solo is far more genre-specific and time-period specific than the absence of the guitar solo.

Of course, the fact of the matter is, solos are one of Metallica's fortés and by playing solos they are playing to one of their strengths. But to over specialize is to breed in weakness. Like the guys said in the documentary, if it suits the song; solo, it if doesn't; don't.

Personally I see that decision as willingness to mature, maybe experiment, try new things. Play outside of their own established, pidgeonholed genre for a time. At least they weren't too afraid to displease the solo-craving fans. But like I said, solos are their forté, and they'll be a welcome return.

So yeah, artistic integrity still intact.

mayordenis

scouser.tommy wrote:

So yeah, artistic integrity still intact.

no it's not, not at all.
I don't think you got doctor J's point at all either,
it wasn't the actual pushing of solo's away or the adopting of D-tuning that he was making a point about more so why they were adopting these new ways.
The reason being they wanted to be in with the current trends, ie. ****ty pointless melodies then straight into a mesh of horrible guitar rant without any sign of their once immortal musicianship.

pbsuxok1znja4r

I got his point, don't worry.
They did it because it probably occured to them that it might sound good, that it might sound new, fresh. You can only write so many palm-muted
E|-000-000-000-|
thrash-style riffs before they start sounding lame. It's clear to me, at least, that Metallica were not trying to jump in with current trends, but rather to outgrow the old ones.

Doctor J

No, you didn't get it. I wasn't suggesting that Metallica turned to **** because they were going somewhere different with their music, I was using the example to illustrate how they were going somewhere different with their music. It was a conscious policy, a specific agenda with their songwriting which was not artistically motivated or inspired. It was a result of analysing what was out there and doing the same thing. For a band of their illustrious pedigree, it was a truly heartbreaking thing to see.

That isn't art, that's a business plan. They weren't considering what was right for the individual pieces of music, instead they were altering their music to fit in with the trends of the time.

pbsuxok1znja4r

Doctor J wrote:

No, you didn't get it. I wasn't suggesting that Metallica turned to **** because they were going somewhere different with their music, I was using the example to illustrate how they were going somewhere different with their music. It was a conscious policy, a specific agenda with their songwriting which was not artistically motivated or inspired. It was a result of analysing what was out there and doing the same thing. For a band of their illustrious pedigree, it was a truly heartbreaking thing to see.

That isn't art, that's a business plan. They weren't considering what was right for the individual pieces of music, instead they were altering their music to fit in with the trends of the time.

You haven't given any evidence as to why you think it was a "business plan", and I doubt if you can come up with much, because it just plain wasn't.

Drop C tuning does not a nu-metal record make.
Lack of solos does not a nu-metal record make.
The point is, they didn't fit in with the trends of the time. It's simply not a nu-metal album, full stop.

If Metallica wanted to sell out, all they had to do was give the fans RTL Mark II or MOP mark II. Do you have any idea how easy that would've been for them? Haven't you asked yourself why, if they are so business-orientated, haven't they just released yet another thrash-riff shred-solo metalfest of an album? It would be a "glorious return to form" and every Metallica fan would buy the album.
I'll tell you why - Because they would be fooling themselves, as artists and as musicians. It would be nothing short of laziness and stagnancy.

St Anger isn't a great album, by any stretch of the imagination, but at least Metallica did something new for them. Some "truly great" metal bands just make the same album over and over again. Much as I like Iron Maiden, for example, they've made the same album at least 7 times over, with little or no evolution/improvement in their sound, and it's rather pathetic, at times.
From the Black album onwards, Metallica matured. You didn't. But don't bother accusing them of selling out.

Doctor J

scouser.tommy wrote:

From the Black album onwards, Metallica matured. You didn't. But don't bother accusing them of selling out.

You don't know a ****ing thing about me so please don't start getting personal, we have discussed this before, don't start getting personal because you disagree with someone, you know what my response will be.

I am old enough to remember Metallica before their association with Bob Rock and while I would never dismiss a band for changing their sound (quite the opposite, too many bands get stuck in a rut and stagnate) I will say I grew quite disillusioned with their change of direction which seemed, to me, soulless. All the evidence you need of their creative shortcomings are there for all to see on their documentary. You should watch it sometime. The fact is they made a policy on that album to not include guitar solos beacuse guitar solos were not in fashion at the time. Fact. It is there for all to see.

You are, of course, quite right, in pointing out that rehashing the old "classic" material would be the easiest way to make a quick buck. Have you seen any of their recent set lists?

Thomas_S_Hunterson

scouser.tommy wrote:

You haven't given any evidence as to why you think it was a "business plan", and I doubt if you can come up with much, because it just plain wasn't.

St. Anger was one of the most digustingly created albums in history as far as true musicianship is concerened.
It was ridiculously overproduced to make it sound underproduced. It was deliberately as simple as possible so as to appeal to aspiring musicians and to make it sound 'edgy'
The recording was the biggest abhorrence of all.
The music tracks were first written and recorded without lyrics , but then a whole six months later, the band wrote lyrics to fit the music and then recorded them.

pbsuxok1znja4r

Holy f*cking sh*t Doc, there was nothing personal in what I said there. I was pointing out the fact that Metallica's sound moved on, and clearly you didn't move with it, so to speak. You just couldn't dig the new stuff. It was an observation of facts, nothing 'personal' was meant in my saying that, so don't take it that way.
Geez.

Don't worry, I've seen the documentary; more than once.

You can type the word "fact" in italics all you want, but Metallica did not drop the solos to become fashionable. There is no reason for them to want to be 'fashionable'. They are already the most loved haevy metal band of all time. Go back and re-read what I said about guitar solos being more genre and time-period specific than no solos, if you still don't get it.

The fact that you are old enough to remember 'Tallica in the good ol' days counts for nothing. The albums are all there, and we've all heard them.

Metallica haven't been unfaithful to their own vision for their music. That's what counts. fact.

Doctor J

As I recall, the word they used was "dated". Dating music refers to it being in context with the other music of it's time, comparing it to whatever else is current at a particular point in time. They dropped solos because they were viewed at the time as dated, in their own words.

If that's not a clear example of adhering to fashion, I don't know what is.

Dragan

mayordenis wrote:

its their last chance to salvage their career in my opinion,

I would agree with this to a point. It's there last chance to salvage their integrity in our eyes would be better though. There "career" is fine, the money making machine rolls on as steadily as it ever did. Concert tickets sell, albums sell. It's all good.

Except for the music.

To be honest i think we are all assuming the rest of the worlds thinks like us.

Kill em All was the first Metallica Album i heard, back when i was a kid even though it had been out for quite a while at that time and it made me like a band that i feel in love with when i got my hands on Master of Puppets and later on .....And Justice For All.

In escence i was ruined because when i bought Load I cried and i haven't really stopped since.

But what about the kids whose first album was Load, what do they think????

Beekay

Dragan wrote:

But what about the kids whose first album was Load, what do they think????

I see your point and it scares me,but my first album was St.Anger:o and then i got into all the good ones and i haven't listened to St.Anger since

Adam

Dragan wrote:

But what about the kids whose first album was Load, what do they think????

Funnily enough, the first album i heard was Load! 9 years ago i found it in my dads cd collection, it caught my eye so i stuck it on and also found justice.

I listened to Load first and really didn't enjoy it, and moved on to justice, which was the album that hooked me! Followed by some ep's and lp's also in the record collection.

4 years later i got my hands on the rest of the albums and went through them and enjoyed every one, as any sane person should! And then I went back to Load...

...and enjoyed it! I dont know what it was, perhaps my own personal taste had altered over the years, but Load stands as one of my favourite tallica albums to date! Its an easy listen, sounds good, and I feel the passion in the musicians comes across more so than other albums, with anthems like the outlaw torn etc. which was once performed live and clocked in at over 14 minutes, an episode i'm sorry i missed!

Fast forward another few years to the present day and i rarely listen to them at all anymore! I got St.Anger the day it came out, listened to it on the way home, drop tuned my guitar when i got home and played through every note of the album, as its all sickeningly similar to play, and havent really listened to it since. I was very disappointed.

As for the solo/no solo debate going on, i dont think it matters at all, because kirks solo's over those riffs = vomit inducing. And even if it worked, the rest of the album is so different from everything else out there that solo's wouldnt be able to catagorise or 'date' the album in the slightest.
And you are both missing the fact that kirk said he wasn't interested in playing "traditional" solo's anymore, so if he played the solo's he had in mind it probably would severely date it, it would go down in history as the day kirk attacked his guitar with a nail polisher!

Here's hoping they deliver a new album worth listening to someday soon anyway!

senordingdong

Ok, so that proves that Metallica do listen to the masses, and hopefully, this will encourage them not to take the nu-metal route again.

Though I'd be more concerned with them going emo now more than anything.

Megatron

Just read the thread there.

Some interesting points , some truth's ( well imo ) and some good auld bashing each other down .


I've been a Metallica fan sinc RTL , and i have to admit i've enjoyed each and every album , i'm not that keen on St.Anger tbh , but it was something different from the usual stuff they do, and one of my fav albums is where they went a bit metal ( and well it was more for the money in the end really) the S&M album , i think i like that album more because it's a live album , and it makes the hairs on the back of my neck/arms/legs stand on end.

Yes James/Lars and Co. changed directions with the Black Album , and Load , reload and all the rest, but i'd prefer that then sticking ina Rut ( as a few people have Echo'd already), yes they will get it very very wrong ( St.anger ) but it's best to view it as them trying something new.

Remember they are people as well , they have infulences as they have always done, they still listen to thier revials , and new sourses of Music and mix and match. Some of it works , some doesn't.

What would i like to see as thier next album ?

Not too sure tbh , as with most of the albums i've just bought it and enjoyed the ride ( the lightning :P ) I've got a few fav tracks , some from the older stuff and yet others from the more recent stuff ( funny how load is considered recent even though it's 9 years old , and lets not forget the black album) like Outlaw Thorn , Mama said , Ain't my Bitch , The Prince, Cure ... loads that i love , none that hate ( most i can up with).

All in all my message is,

CHill , and we will all go see them live anway

Dae Han

Metallica are here in June BTW, June 11th RDS. Should be a cracker!

Megatron

Dae Han wrote:

Metallica are here in June BTW, June 11th RDS. Should be a cracker!

THey playing on the 12th as well ?

Adam

Megatron wrote:

THey playing on the 12th as well ?

How do ya figure???

mickymg2003

Doctor J wrote:

No, you didn't get it. I wasn't suggesting that Metallica turned to **** because they were going somewhere different with their music, I was using the example to illustrate how they were going somewhere different with their music. It was a conscious policy, a specific agenda with their songwriting which was not artistically motivated or inspired. It was a result of analysing what was out there and doing the same thing. For a band of their illustrious pedigree, it was a truly heartbreaking thing to see.

That isn't art, that's a business plan. They weren't considering what was right for the individual pieces of music, instead they were altering their music to fit in with the trends of the time.

I'd have to say that thats not the impression i got from watchin some kind of monster. It looks like the music changed because the way they write the music changed and the band dynamic changed with kirk getting more involved and jason leaving. Maybe it was a business decision but thats not the impression i got but i could be wrong.

December Son

scouser.tommy wrote:

Yeah wise men learn from their mistakes, but not from their fans' criticisms. Metallica produced more than a few goddamn amazing albums by sticking to their guns and having faith in their own personal sense of what sounds good. 99% of Metallica's fans couldn't write a decent song to save their lives. Where would Metallica be if they just pandered to their ungrateful audience and produced whatever they theought the "fans" wanted to hear? Then they would cease to really be a band.

Metallica's artistic integrity remains entirely intact, IMO. St Anger may be my least favourite Metallica album, but that album proves that Metallica write what they write for themselves and not for their 'fans'. Hell, they've been proving that since Load. So just get used to the idea that they don't f*cking care what kind of music you think they should write.

Oh lord.
I'm sorry Tommy. I'm sorry your favourite band are a sell out, corporate merchandising, money making franchise at this stage and you just cant admit it.
Artistic integrity?? Metallica have been all about the $ since the black album. It stopped being about the music a LONG time ago.
If they were really proud of thier new material, you think they would still play live sets of material from 20 years ago? Look at slayer. Thier new stuff is good, if not amazing, compared to reign in blood et al, but at thier last show here a good portion of the gig was material off god hates us all, they even opened the show with the title track from GHUA. Now imagine Metallica opening a gig in the RDS with 'invisible kid' or 'mama said'. The place would be empty after 5 minutes.
Why?
Because all thier new material is terrible, toadying to current musical trends. the 'load' era was pandering to stripped down grunge style rock, ST. Anger toadied to Nu - metal. The reason? $. Plain and simple.
"What are the kids listening to nowadays Lars?"
"Nu metal, James. We should do that, i need a new yacht"
"Okay here ill just take a sh!t on my guitar for 50 minutes and well call it St. Anger, k?"
"Fine let me know when its done, ill be in Hawaii"
Its sad, because thier old material is a work of genius. But the only way you'll see good new material from metallica would involve some sort of voodoo ritual to raise cliff burton from the grave. You'll get new material all right, just dont expect it to be anything better than 'piss poor'.

pbsuxok1znja4r

December Son wrote:

Oh lord.
I'm sorry Tommy. I'm sorry your favourite band are a sell out, corporate merchandising, money making franchise at this stage and you just cant admit it.
Artistic integrity?? Metallica have been all about the $ since the black album. It stopped being about the music a LONG time ago.
If they were really proud of thier new material, you think they would still play live sets of material from 20 years ago? Look at slayer. Thier new stuff is good, if not amazing, compared to reign in blood et al, but at thier last show here a good portion of the gig was material off god hates us all, they even opened the show with the title track from GHUA. Now imagine Metallica opening a gig in the RDS with 'invisible kid' or 'mama said'. The place would be empty after 5 minutes.
Why?
Because all thier new material is terrible, toadying to current musical trends. the 'load' era was pandering to stripped down grunge style rock, ST. Anger toadied to Nu - metal. The reason? $. Plain and simple.
"What are the kids listening to nowadays Lars?"
"Nu metal, James. We should do that, i need a new yacht"
"Okay here ill just take a sh!t on my guitar for 50 minutes and well call it St. Anger, k?"
"Fine let me know when its done, ill be in Hawaii"
Its sad, because thier old material is a work of genius. But the only way you'll see good new material from metallica would involve some sort of voodoo ritual to raise cliff burton from the grave. You'll get new material all right, just dont expect it to be anything better than 'piss poor'.

Heh, Metallica aren't exactly my favourite band, you know. Personally I don't care too much whether they've sold out or not, I just happen to think that the truth is that they haven't.

Ahhh, yet another Cliff Burton fanboy. Goodluck with that Voodoo ritual mate, lemme know how it works out. Personally I'd prefer Newsted.

Haha and just so you know, I loved Load and Reload. Both superb albums, regardless of 'why' Metallica adopted that style. The Outlaw Torn, for example, happens to be one of my favourite songs by Metallica, and we can thank Newsted for much of that one. :cool:

dimerocks

hey if the kids whose first album was load maybe they could take until it sleeps out of it. i think it is the best song they have written since anything of and justice.

Adam

I object to being called a kid!

To be honest, Until It Sleeps is one of my least favourite tracks on Load, I'm with scouser.tommy on The Outlaw Torn as one of my favourite songs!

As for December Son, what are you on about?! First off, when I go to see Metallica this summer, and they opened with Invisible Kid or Mama Said i'd be walkin nowhere boyo! Because they would be jumping on a very different approach to the gig that bands rarely take! Sets are usually very predictable, regardless of who you are seeing!

As for your little Slayer tangent, I suppose the fact that Metallica, Slayer, Megadeth, Anthrax etc. etc. were all playing thrash metal in the Bay Area back in the day because it was UNpopular?! No.

Are you aware that Pantera were a glam rock covers band before they made it big? You think they should have continued doing that, or rolled with the musical times like every band does! I beg of you, whip out Show No Mercy and have a good listen, then slap on God Hates Us All (both great albums btw) and then tell me that Slayer haven't changed drastically!

All bands evolve, its just that for some reason people out there who know nothing and are bitter about something like to stick it to the tallica boyz to try and aggravate the many millions of fans... :rolleyes:

dimerocks

and by covers band you mean originals i assume. oantera weren't part of the bay area scene either.

Adam

Oops, ok so one slip not bad for a lengthy post! Replace them with Anthrax, or Megadeth if you like, point still comes across, thrash was THE scene in that era.

As for the covers, you stand corrected on that one my friend! Pantera began playing together in the 11th grade, covering glam bands like KISS.

December Son

fade_to_grey wrote:

I object to being called a kid!
As for that twonk December Son, what are you on about?! First off, when I go to see Metallica this summer, and they opened with Invisible Kid or Mama Said i'd be walkin nowhere boyo! Because they would be jumping on a very different approach to the gig that bands rarely take! Sets are usually very predictable, regardless of who you are seeing!

As for your little Slayer tangent, I suppose the fact that Metallica, Slayer, Megadeth, Anthrax etc. etc. were all playing thrash metal in the Bay Area back in the day because it was UNpopular?! No.

Are you aware that Pantera were a glam rock covers band before they made it big? You think they should have continued doing that, or rolled with the musical times like every band does! I beg of you, whip out Show No Mercy and have a good listen, then slap on God Hates Us All (both great albums btw) and then tell me that Slayer haven't changed drastically!

All bands evolve, its just that for some reason people out there who know nothing and are bitter about something like to stick it to the tallica boyz to try and aggravate the many millions of fans... :rolleyes:

Stop acting like a kid then and maybe people wont refer to you as one. Twonk??
Anyway, im well aware of pantera being glam metal. Thats not the topic of discussion. Again, i was listening to metallica, and metal in general probably quite literally before you were born, i know what im talking about.

Theres a huge, gaping difference between a band evolving, and a band making a conscious decision to change thier sound based on whats popular at the time. Metallica are a money making corporate cock sucking exercise in pioneering new and innovative ways to suck bollocks and they do it royally.
They sat down with bob rock, decided what would sell records, and made themselves sound like that. If metallica were TRULY evolving as a band, St. Anger and the putrid filth that preceeded it, would have gone in a DIFFERENT direction than whats popular. Sick of making 'chugga chugga' palm muted thrash riffs? Fine! Go and INNOVATE. Dont EMULATE. Which is what metallica have been doing since 1992. Emulating the sound of whats popular. Mid 90's, theyre grungy. 2000's, theyre nu metally. Evolving my f*cking hole. Other bands should by rights be copying metallicas sound, not the other way around. Its a sad state of affairs when someone like slipknot could produce a heavier (and better) album then metallica.

So you can go see them belt out such classics as invisible kid/fuel/i disappear safe in the knowledge youre lining lars pockets and setting them up to make even more disappointing, abhorrent albums. Congratulations.

Adam

December Son wrote:

They sat down with bob rock, decided what would sell records, and made themselves sound like that.

I'm assuming you were in on this conversation, yes?

I doubt it.

If Metallica were in to $ on St. Anger it wouldn't have been St. Anger, it would have been Puppets II or the Black Album II! Because rest assured, if they had simply wanted to jump on the band-wagon of nu metal (which it is really not) to make money, it wouldn't sound anything like it does. Its raw in sound, production, and compsition.

And it DOES NOT appeal to everybody! As is clearly demonstrated by the fact that half the fan base would call it their least favourite album! And while there are many people i know that wouldn't be a particularly big fan but still own a copy of the Black Album, there are none that own a copy of St. Anger! Proving that they went as far from appealing to the masses as possible! How that equates to being driven by money i do not know, but i think its clear that your argument is driven by nothing but speculation and you demeaning opinion.

And whats wrong with slipknot producing a better album? First off, thats a matter of opinion and secondly, why shouldn't they be capable of such? Metallica and Slipknot, all humans alike. None above the others.

dimerocks

anthrax weren't bay area either:)

Adam

Not from there, but as with other bands associated with the Bay Area, its considered the starting point. The same is true for the likes of Testament, Possessed, Exodus, Death Angel etc. etc.

Anthrax played at a Bay Area Reunion known as thrash of the titans after Chuck Billy was diagnosed with cancer.

December Son

fade_to_grey wrote:

Its raw in sound, production, and compsition. .

I...just....but....
Oh dear god. The mind truly boggles. Really and truly.
I cant even discuss this anymore. Suffice to say St. anger, is so overproduced its a shambles. A first year sound technician could do a better job, and might even get the drums to sound like drums and not garbage cans in a washing machine.
And was i there to witness it when they decided to sell out and whore themselves for the almighty $? No. But i was there when multi millionaire lars ulrich announced that if you werent willing to pay $15 for a metallica CD, he didnt want you as a fan. MONEY. HUNGRY. WHORES.

Metallica are past thier sell by date and no longer musically important. My opinion, im entitled to it, and youre entitled to yours. Thats all ive got to say on the subject.

Megatron

fade_to_grey wrote:

How do ya figure???

Well i was more hoping is all .


My B-day is the 12th , guess i'll be back in dublin for the gig either way , Have only missed 1 gig fo thiers in dublin inn 14 years

Megatron

December Son wrote:

But i was there when multi millionaire lars ulrich announced that if you werent willing to pay $15 for a metallica CD, he didnt want you as a fan. MONEY. HUNGRY. WHORES.

No Lars is the Whore ... he does have a big sway with the band ( as him and Jimbo are the founding members) , But 1 man doesn't make a band ( well apart from the Rollins band , but that is just a bad example :P

December Son wrote:

Metallica are past thier sell by date and no longer musically important. My opinion, im entitled to it, and youre entitled to yours. Thats all ive got to say on the subject.

Yes your correct , it is your opinion , 1 i disagree with but hey , that's what part of what makes music fun .

i was gona point out that Avril lasanage ( or however you spell her name) did Fuel for the tribute to metallica ( ego stroking if ever i've seen it) so they can still influnce young minds

dimerocks

anthrax were part of the new york scene sure they played bay area but they were not located there. anyway i get your point i'm just being awkward.