Metallica Superthread -All Metallica discussion goes in here

finhex

Midlife crisis man wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the hardwired album, plus they played a song from a certain album that never existed (have they not gotten booed enough every time they try to play one of those songs)

So far I have watched bluray few times and then just listened cds two times. I really loved Hardwired album and also Death Magnetic so I enjoy those songs included in the set. And this stripped version of All Within My Hands is very nice tune from the album which doesn't exists.

This is far better than original S&M

scudzilla

finhex wrote: »

This is far better than original S&M

Not by a country mile

greenspurs

I didnt really 'get' S&M, and if less so S&M2 ..... but by jaysus , the version of Pulling Teeth on the cello is amazing !!!!
Goosebumps watching it!

I love the little glimpse that you get of Kirk in the background just as its over, you can see him nod , with a "fcuk yeh" grin on his face... (on the official film)
A magic moment.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/san-francisco-symphony-bassist-on-show-stopping-tribute-to-metallicas-cliff-burton-891589/

ozzy jr

When I listen to Metallica I want to hear guitars and drums. I have no interest in hearing what a violin sounds like on Creeping Death and so on. It's all a load of pretentious crap tbh.

I watched the S&M2 on Sky Arts a couple of weeks ago, and it was dreadful. For some reason they kept showing close up of people in the crowd, who were clearly planted there, as they looked totally out of place at a Metallica gig.

The version of Pulling Teeth, as superb as the musician was, it really did nothing for me.

Granadino

ozzy jr wrote: »

When I listen to Metallica I want to hear guitars and drums. I have no interest in hearing what a violin sounds like on Creeping Death and so on. It's all a load of pretentious crap tbh.

I watched the S&M2 on Sky Arts a couple of weeks ago, and it was dreadful. For some reason they kept showing close up of people in the crowd, who were clearly planted there, as they looked totally out of place at a Metallica gig.

The version of Pulling Teeth, as superb as the musician was, it really did nothing for me.

I tend to agree with you. It doesn't add anything for me. If it were just a full orchestra and no band doing classical interpretations of the back catalogue, that could be interesting.
I remember the first S&M used to show close ups of metal heads sat in with classical music fans. It was as if it was "look we are normal people, we are not wild animals"...

Church on Tuesday

The original S&M was fairly groundbreaking for the metal community though. It was a genuinely mostly interesting experiment at the time.

A new one was always pretty unnecessary; you can't top the original and it was a much more intimate and daring experience in 99.

The Nal

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

The original S&M was fairly groundbreaking for the metal community though..

Not that groundbreaking....

Church on Tuesday

The Nal wrote: »

Not that groundbreaking....

I said for the metal community, not classic rock.

The Nal

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

I said for the metal community, not classic rock.

They were one of the first heavy metal bands

Church on Tuesday

The Nal wrote: »

They were one of the first heavy metal bands

Not really.

Ash.J.Williams

The Nal wrote: »

They were one of the first heavy metal bands

one or two members of the band would vomit upon hearing that

ush

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

one or two members of the band would vomit upon hearing that

Old british rockers are often contrarians.

ush

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

The original S&M was fairly groundbreaking for the metal community though. It was a genuinely mostly interesting experiment at the time.

Nah, it was a tired effort. Bands can go through a rock opera or November Rain video phase. The whole project relied on kids not knowing that Purple already did it.

Church on Tuesday

ush wrote: »

Nah, it was a tired effort. Bands can go through a rock opera or November Rain video phase. The whole project relied on kids not knowing that Purple already did it.

Again, and this really is not rocket science folks, it was absolutely groundbreaking for a thrash metal band to play with an orchestra, no metal band had done it before, so it was absolutely a total novelty at the time.

ush

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Again, and this really is not rocket science folks, it was absolutely groundbreaking for a thrash metal band to play with an orchestra, no metal band had done it before, so it was absolutely a total novelty at the time.

Death to fake metal with symphonic arrangements!

Anesthetize

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Again, and this really is not rocket science folks, it was absolutely groundbreaking for a thrash metal band to play with an orchestra, no metal band had done it before, so it was absolutely a total novelty at the time.

There was nothing groundbreaking about S&M. Metal bands like Therion and Rage had already collaborated with live orchestras before S&M.

Church on Tuesday

Anesthetize wrote: »

There was nothing groundbreaking about S&M. Metal bands like Therion and Rage had already collaborated with live orchestras before S&M.

Symphonic metal has been around since, I think, the early 90s so if we really want to be pedantic about things you could say that it's been done way before in the metal realm. Albeit with only samples and some recorded instrumentation on albums.

Therion didn't record an album with orchestra until 2000 I think, S&M was out in 99.

It was groundbreaking for its time. The marriage of a fairly mainstream metal band giving it's older material a classical re-imagining was something novel for your average metal fan and causal listener alike. It was massively popular too.

But look, seemingly Purple, that classic hard rock band with all those aggressive riffs you love, are metal now so it's all redundant I guess. :rolleyes:

Dyr

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

The original S&M was fairly groundbreaking for the metal community though. It was a genuinely mostly interesting experiment at the time.

A new one was always pretty unnecessary; you can't top the original and it was a much more intimate and daring experience in 99.

It wasnt groundbreaking though, it was like putting tits on a bull by and large. There were metal acts that used orchestral elements before that but didnt have silly amounts of money to spend an orchestra

Then you have symphonic metal...god bless us and save us

Church on Tuesday

Bambi wrote: »

It wasnt groundbreaking though, it was like putting tits on a bull by and large. There were metal acts that used orchestral elements before that but didnt have silly amounts of money to spend an orchestra

Then you have symphonic metal...god bless us and save us

I think S&M is mostly great.

I guess it comes down to personal taste.

Anesthetize

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Symphonic metal has been around since, I think, the early 90s so if we really want to be pedantic about things you could say that it's been done way before in the metal realm. Albeit with only samples and some recorded instrumentation on albums.

Therion didn't record an album with orchestra until 2000 I think, S&M was out in 99.

Therion released the album Vovin in 1998, which didn't use samples

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_NtCdMdGrg

Rage released the album Lingua Mortis in 1996, a collaboration with the Prague Symphony Orchestra

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a_E0kAHPCE

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

It was groundbreaking for its time. The marriage of a fairly mainstream metal band giving it's older material a classical re-imagining was something novel for your average metal fan and causal listener alike. It was massively popular too.

There's nothing groundbreaking about taking an already existing idea, and throwing more money and promotion behind it.

Church on Tuesday

Anesthetize wrote: »

Therion released the album Vovin in 1998, which didn't use samples

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_NtCdMdGrg

Rage released the album Lingua Mortis in 1996, a collaboration with the Prague Symphony Orchestra

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a_E0kAHPCE

There's nothing groundbreaking about taking an already existing idea, and throwing more money and promotion behind it.

Fair enough, I'm not a symphonic metal fan and I'd wager most people have never heard of said acts. I've never heard of Rage.

And this is kinda the point; you take a mainstream fairly well known act in Metallica at the time and put them, a thrash metal band, with an orchestra and it becomes a pretty ground breaking thing; it attracts new fans and most probably a lot of people then sought out the symphonic metal genre later on as a result.

I've already acknowledged the fact that said genre predates S&M by some time and yeah, they had the money and promotion to bring it to the masses and it became a hugely popular release as a result with mainstream metal/casual fans.

S.M.B.

I think S&M is less groundbreaking than Church on Tuesday is making out but it's also more ground breaking than what others are claiming (even if the ground being broke is within the mainstream or on a level only accessible to few bands).

Surely everyone can agree that S&M2 is less groundbreaking than SM1 though.

Church on Tuesday

S.M.B. wrote: »

I think S&M is less groundbreaking than Church on Tuesday is making out but it's also more ground breaking than what others are claiming (even if the ground being broke is within the mainstream or on a level only accessible to few bands).

Surely everyone can agree that S&M2 is less groundbreaking than SM1 though.

Fair comment and look, perhaps I'm a bit biased as I have fond memories of jamming along to the concert and with friends back in the day but it was a cool thing for 1999 when exposure and access to these kinds of things weren't what they are today.

S.M.B.

I think it was a pretty big deal for a band with Metallica's history to that point to do something like S&M and I think it works quite well.

I guess others are coming from the angle that it's not like Metallica invented some new sub genre of metal never heard before they tried their hand at it.

Mental Mickey

https://youtu.be/jSedXGIH6CM

Epic

klose

Mental Mickey wrote: »

https://youtu.be/jSedXGIH6CM

Epic

Fairly often I listen to this version, the load/reload songs in s&m just pop.

klose

S.M.B. wrote: »

I think S&M is less groundbreaking than Church on Tuesday is making out but it's also more ground breaking than what others are claiming (even if the ground being broke is within the mainstream or on a level only accessible to few bands).

Surely everyone can agree that S&M2 is less groundbreaking than SM1 though.

Can't imagine many would disagree with that sentiment, it was essentially a 20th anniversary gig of the original to open a new concert arena in San Francisco.

ush

Mental Mickey wrote: »

https://youtu.be/jSedXGIH6CM

Epic

Groundbreaking ©

ush

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

But look, seemingly Purple, that classic hard rock band with all those aggressive riffs you love, are metal now so it's all redundant I guess. :rolleyes:

Your point about classic rock is an anachronism. Was classic rock classic in the 70s?

ush

Bambi wrote: »

There were metal acts that used orchestral elements before that but didnt have silly amounts of money to spend an orchestra

They were groundbreaking amounts of cash in fairness.