The new metallica album is being released on the 10th of June so who's gonna buy it?

I'll more than likely pick it up.

You can find out more info about it on thier wesite www.metallica.com or you can pick up some kewl wallpapers and icons and such by clicking this link. http://www.metallica.com/stanger/stanger.asp

Oh yeah this tuesday MTV2 will be airing the new video from this album called St. Anger at 12:00 noon and then they will be re-airing it on the hour every hour after noon till midnite for those who missed it,so check it out...

Screw Metalica

Metallica... one of my 4 major bands that I automatically buy when they release a new album... I'm all over this one, especially since it's being compared to their "old" stuff.

I say screw metallica also! No more Jason Newstead, one of the biggest sell-out bands ever. I gave up on them after Metallica - Metallica. I am sure this album will suck along with everthing they have released after Metallica-Metallica. Long live thier old albums though! Master of Puppets, And Justice For All.....good shit. As for present Metallica........

Screw Metallica. I said bye to them after they tried to sue their fans over the Napster thing.

They are almost as good as Spinal Tap just without the meaningful lyrics

I DID love Metallica, but they sort of lost me during that whole Napster deal. I saw them as whiny and representative of the Music industry as a whole. But I still can rock out to Master of Puppets and Garage Days Revisited.

Kill Them All = Great
Ride The lightening = Great
Master of Puppets = Great
And Justice For All = Great
"Black album" = Utter shit
Load = Load of crap
Reload = as if the first one wasn't bad enough

throw in napster and metallica has had a run of crap for a good 10 years...

I am highly skeptical...

i would venture a guess more likely than not the new album is not "like there old stuff" but is a poor attempt to recreate a style, emotion and aggression that metallica as musicians lost a long time ago... after listening to the sample of "Frantic" off the website it sure sounds liek they are trying to hard... what used to come natural is now something they have to work for, some thing contrived...

I hope im wrong

Metallica touring this summer with Drowning Pool. Rob Zombie will be lead vocals for Drowning Pool. That is pretty lame in my book. Metallica put out some good music but became a bunch of prima-donnas. Zombie is definitely looking for some headlines pulling this gig.

im lost?

metallica is touring with linkin park and limp bizkit i thought

The problem with Metallica is that they as individuals and a group, got old.. Not too many bands can keep their same "edge" as they age. Metallica should have hung it up after and Justice for All, and faded out with style and dignity... They are nothing more than posers who have sold out to the "man" now.....

Just heard the title tune from the new CD. It sucks ass, very dissapointing. To describe, it sounds like a mix between Megadeath and Celine Dion.

thats just my opinion and I could be wrong

Metallica sucks ... I'm into Ja Rule, Ludacris and 50 Cent

Interesting... I just heard the title song "St. Anger" and it freakin' rocked. (Of course I'm a die hard Metallica fan, so I "get" there music.) This song was unique for sure because it sounded like their old stuff and new mixed together with an even newer sound. Only Metallica can do that with their stuff and make it work. Of course no matter what, fans and nonfans are going to find some way to criticize it... that's what you do when you have a band that's been as dominate as they have been. It's not out yet, but you can already mark me down as owning it.

I keep hearing that they went back to their original formula for music on this album. Maybe it's worth listening too??? Anybody know where you can preview a clip???

OK, im just gonna act like that wasn't an insult aimed at people who loved metallica before they sucked



i just heard it too, if you consider sounding like shit "working" then yeah the new metallica songs "Works"



i dont mean to be personaly insulting with this but, i just dont understood this... i honestly thought everyone would quit listening when the Black album sucked ass... i thought they stopped being a dominate force in music when they became irrelevant... oh well... maybe warmed over, uninventive music is now dominant...

I have to hear more... im still undecided, but honestly i am less than unimpressed... actually what i have heard has given me even less faith that metallica was ever good... im starting to think the first 4 albums were flukes

click the stanger link in the first post... you can here three songs... but it is also in rotation on rock radio

Just listened to it. Sound like Godsmack to me...

When Metallica sound like another band, and not the other way around, it's time to hang it up....

I won't be buying this Metallica album either. Black was the last one I purchased, and I only liked 3 songs off of it. All their albums before that completely rocked.....

the godsmack referance is a bit of a complement... i dont find it that appealing.

but you are right about the fact that they need to give it up when they sound like other bands...

Save your money and pick up 'The Golden Age of Grotesque' from Marilyn Manson instead. Much more fun to listen to.

yup... check my sig

nothing like manson singing big band swing inspired scat

Actually, it sort of was. I especially love the take, "Metallica died with Cliff Burton." Get over it and turn the page. They've moved on with the rest of the world, putting out new stuff that still rocks (and In Justice for all album was as good, if not better than the previous albums).
Let me guess, you compared it to the old stuff (as that's how you still want to view Metallica today). Let me remind you, that was 20 years ago. It hardly worked then and it's not going to work now. Plus, James's voice is more mature and he can't sing like that anymore. They have to go with what works and they do a pretty good job of it (changing their sound and still sounding good - this is where some bands fall off the earth).
There's another one of those takes. Yeah, the Black album sucked. How come everyone finally knew of them after it came out? All of their old stuff owes the black album everything because once the Black album came out and everyone loved it (oh yeah, it sucked), people realized there were 5 earlier albums (including Garage Days) and made those popular as well. There were only a few people that were able to listen to the old stuff at the time it came out because it wasn't mainstream. Granted, after people went back and listed to the old stuff they realized the Black album wasn't as good, but to say it sucks is just wrong.

Here's to Metallica, the Led Zepplin of my generation!

I agree...I heard three tracks off the new Shitallica.....Absolute crap. The best part of that band died when Cliff Burton died. "Sad but True."

Oh well....they've sucked for so long it really doesn't matter anymore.

The new Manson, I agree, is quite interesting. I have not paid attention to him since "Smells Like....", but I picked this new one up and was rather impressed with a good bit of it.

Trivia question for your guys (and gals) out there.....What Scandinavian band did Manson's new bass player originally hit limited success with? It was quite a while ago.....

:p

I like Godsmack for the most part, just don't like the fact that the new Metallica stuff seems to sound like them.

I like all their albums. I even get in the mood for tracks off their S&M CD occasionally. I'm sure I'll own St. Anger.

With all the Napster fighting, tThink their new CDs will have some copy protection?

i would say people knowing of metallica when the blakc album came out was more about the fact that THEY NEVER HAD A MUSIC VIDEO BEFORE "One" so they didn't have a built in commercial audience until the black album....

honestly my favorite metallica album is ...and justice for all.

But i have never understood how anyone could listen to that... then listen to the stuff since and view any of it as anything but a watered down version of a formerly great and influencal band... metallica has not released one bit of influencal music since ...and justce.

the do de3serve MTV Icon status... bu tit should have been done before the black album... metallica has done nothing but tarnish their legacy since then

--------edited because i was so excited about my six degrees of seperation that i forgot to include the answer-------- shotgun messiah

Better trivia:
What german-american band did Tim Skold Have success with: KMFDM

What was tim sklolds solo project Named: Skold

who was the producer: Siebold

Who produced my bands albums: siebold

the six degrees thing is scary... tims a good guy, hung out with him a few times... honestly i liked the first 3 manson albums.... holywood sucked... and the reason i came back to it this time is because of Skold...

Tim Skold of Skold ORRRRRRR Shotgun Messiah

am i right? What did I win?

In reality....".....And Justice" was so strong because the band was still inuitively influenced by the impact of Burton's input. Jason Newsted is a phenomenal musician, but unfortunately he was not permitted to have a lasting impact on the songcrafting and writing of Shitallica music.....But he womping ass now in Voivod.

Very cool.....and very good trivia.....

I like Master Of Puppets, etc. And then I like Enya. Go figure.

Nothing gets by you guys.....Damn I thought I was maybe asking something kinda obscure.....

yup... im diggin the new manson and that toby kieth, willie nelson song...

i definately like diverse music

I used to be a huge shotgun Messiah fan after Violent New Breed came out, then I followed on to his solo project Skold. Kind of lost interest after that until now.

Todrick ; What band were or are you in? Any mp3's?

check out

KMFDM "symols"(it has no name just a series of symbols"
KMFDM "Adios"

MDFMK "MDFMK"

KMFDM "Attak"

some great Skold performances.

I was in a band called "KDC"

our biggest success was a series of dates opening for Frontline Assembly that followed our headlining tour of the US/canada supporting the release of our Album "Dark Skies" The interesting foot note to the story is i started the "Dark skies" tours as a guitar tech(my buddy played guitar in the band) partway through the tour he got thrown out and i replaced him(picking up percussion in addition to guitar) for the tour and the begining of recording the next album "A+0(m)" before i left the band, to be a dad... the singer Ryan Gribbin wa sthe best man at my wedding a couple years later...

MSN has KDC samples in their entertainment section...

"Collection for Injection" was the first album and was before my time...

"Dark Skies" and "A+0(m)" are from my era

Metallica today is another product of MTV. Cut your hair and change your sound so you can keep up with the times....after all your target audience is now 12-16 year olds!! They are a fricken sell out joke. When Metallica started they were a dominating force (hell, they even have the best name any rock band could ever want), now they have been reduced to whining little bitches. Garbage!

Oh also Skold did some producing with The NewlyDeads (former members of Faster Pussy Cat and Bang Tango)

newly deads theres an obscure refereance...

why not mention his more notable producing/mixing credits:

Peter Murphy and Lords of Acid

Damn thats right. Not sure I could dig up any more info on the dude with out it spanning off to other acts (6 degrees once again).
Still he totally tried to bring Industrial to the mainstream with Violent New Breed. Great album that flopped horribly.
Also was the origanl Bass player for Shotgun Messiah and on the second album took over vocals and hired a bass player to tour with them from St Louis (no idea the guys name)

I actually really like Shotgun Messiah....a very unique sound for their time. But you couls also tell that they would never proceed past 2nd tier.

More trivia...

What has 9 arms and sucks ?

def leppard?

LOL

dude, seriously i think im right

So who has bought it (St.Anger)?

I did last night (used, already). I've listened to three songs so far, and I like it.

I agree pretty much. I was never a huge fan, but everything from "Load" onward is pretty lame. They are basically a parody of themselves now, kinda like spinal tap. Hetfield and his sneers are pretty silly. It's actually funny to watch them now, trying to still be so "hardcore". I think they still have talent, but their music lately has just sucked.

I have to admit. Regarding Hetfield, this morning I was listening to, I think, the 3rd song on the St. Anger CD, and he went into a sneer/cry different than what I've heard before. It was literally comical, kind of a screech, and it made me laugh out loud.

But for the most part, the stuff still sounds good to me.

Metallica can shampoo my crotch.....

Hey Todrick,

I checked out KDC and it is actually pretty cool. You guys were kinda like KMFDM....pretty impressed. How come you gave up on the whole music scene??

I am not a big Metallica fan (too played out), but like several of their songs. I got a copy of this CD, and I must say, it sucks. It sounds like they got together in their garage and just started playing...out of synch.

I was a huge metallica fan all the way back to kill 'em all. I threw away all my stuff after the napster thing. I mean they got their start off of people trading tapes.

kids...

i don't see how any responsible father can be in a signed band and tour 6-9 months a year(metallica included)

Ozzy does

I used to listen Kevorkian Death Cycle. I just checked and I found an old mp3 for Never Say Never. Now I have to go through all my old crappy industrial CDs.

Now to dust off some Electric Hellfire Club...

LOL... i wasnt in the band when they did "never say never"... and wasnt a fan of it, you need to hear the cover of Relax by frankie goes to hollywood that we did... that was a quality tune... or the cover from the TV terror compilation of the "one day at a time" theme song.

Metallica = Sellouts? NO WAY!
Metallica = Posers? NO FUCKIN WAY!

You guys crack me up. It would be a lot more sad if Metallica (at their age) were still trying to do the things they did in the mid-eighties. It would be like Al Bundy dreaming of his high school football accomplishments.

In my opinion, Metallica has grown as a band. They have matured in a fashion that most metal heads can't understand. You know the type, a thirty something, used up, long haired tough guy that acts like they're still in high school. Do you really think that this type of person could understand the subtle nuances of Metallica's 90's style? I don't.

If the music has a chorus and understandable lyrics these guys don't like it. Nevermind the technical skill displayed by Metallica when they play their instruments, if the song doesn't have the stereotypical metal thrash sound then it sucks. I'm sorry, but I prefer to listen to music that is not only creative but technically sound.

I believe that most metal bands wouldn't know how to play an instrument if their life depended on it. There is a difference between playing an instrument and thrashing an instrument. Most metal bands thrash instruments. If you don't believe me than ask a metal head to play some Bach or jazz riffs. Not shit they heard a thousand times and can replicate but stuff that requires talent and skill.

Art is subjective and it would be a shame if Metallica didn't explore their 90's style like they did. Their old music may be better but that doesn't mean that their newer music isn't good in it's own style.

Who cares how old they are?? Does that really have an effect on their music?? As far as I can tell, there are only a few reasons for changing the way you sound as a band.
1. You are tired of playing the style you have played
2. Your record company told you to
3. You want a bigger piece of the demographic
There are probably more...but out of these 3 I think that Metallica wanted a bigger piece of the demographic. We all know by now that Metallica is largely driven by money and how many times over they can become millionares!! They still had a huge fanbase before Load!!! Why did they change their style?? To appeal to the younger crowd!! All kids want to hear nowadays are the sell out Staind like bands. It all started with Limp Bisquit...look at them now!! If Metallica would have kept their original musical style (who cares about how their hair is cut ect...that is just marketing tools to make money) they would still be hugely popular today! Did Led Zepplin ever change styles?? All of the classics that are still popular today kept the same style, explored different creative ideas, while still maintaining their millionare status. Metallica is just a bunch of greedy sell-outs who will eventually be forgotten just like Guns-n-Roses. Barely anybody listened to their new stuff because it was crap (after the 2 disc album). But Appetite for Destruction was amazing.

ohhh...one more thing. If you want to say that they are not all about money...then explain why the fuck it costs $75.00 to go see them... Radio stations all over the place are getting bad reviews...go to FM99 and check out the vote page on St Anger...over half of the listeners in the Hampton Roads area (Virginia) don't like it and want them to stop playing it!! This is a really popular rock station!

I bought it last night at Target, only because at $9.98, it was at least worth checking out. It even came with a DVD. I'll add to the list of people here who aren't impressed. Even though I haven't made it through the whole CD, I've only found one song that I like so far, "Frantic". The rest so far is lacking in the musicality department. It all sounds like a bunch of noise, I honestly thought something was wrong with my CD player when I was listening to it. So between the noise they call guitars, and the screaming vocals, I'm disappointed.

musically, and technically, i can say that Hetfield, Ullrich, and Newstead were all incredible as individuals, and as a group for the first 4 albums (even the black one).

now, i don't understand what they've done exactly, but from what i have heard, they have taken "music" and tossed the idea out the window. it's like they're not even playing the same shit.

the lyrics really suck now, too.

they're not the same band. too bad they don't realise what they've become, and how bad they sound. it's sad to waste that talent.

My thoughts almost exactly. I've been very dissapointed with them since ...And Justice For All.

What you guys don't understand is that TRUE artists grow and evolve. If your art is standing still then I will argue that you aren't an artist. An artist also takes chances and puts their heart and soul on the line for all to see and criticize. I would never expect a band that's been in the scene for decades to remain the same throughout their career.

Remember, the goal of art is to extract emotion from the viewer/listener, whether it's positive or negative emotion. If the viewer/listener is indifferent about the piece than the artist didn't do his job.

You guys don't like their newer stuff and that's cool. But, to call Metallica sell outs is small minded. You obviously don't understand what art is. Art is the marriage of creative thought and technical skill. The better of each and the better the art.

As far as the money goes, when is the last time you worked for free (hobbies and private businesses don't count). Do you go into work and tell your boss that because you really like your job you don't want to be paid for it? I highly doubt it. If Metallic can get paid then more power to them. They need to take advantage of the payday now because it probably won't last. What's wrong with that? Would you deny Metallic from collecting what the market says they can for their services?

Malocs, you almost made sense, but then contradicted yourself and nullified your whole argument.

the second you worry about the "payday" is the second you are no longer an artist.

I'd say Metallica stopped being "Artists" soon after "...and justice for all"

So good bands don't have to eat or pay the mortgage ?

The only real artist is Prince anyway

If the record company tells you to sound like whoever is most popular and you will make more money, then they are not being artists! There is no creativitiy in that at all!! That would be like telling Van Gough that if he painted his pieces in a different way (the way the manager tells him) that he would make more money!! Art is about feeling and personal style. A true artist will not change his/her personal style soley for the purpose of making more money. Don't forget that we are talking about Metallica here. It isn't like they were worrying about putting food on their plates. They changed their style/image so they can be worth 25 million instead of 20 million!!! That is ridiculous!!!

Bingo. Neither of wich Metallica possesses anymore (at least not on anything since the black album came out). They peaked back in the early 90's and now are just another corporate rock act (i.e. Aerosmith) lured into the studio by the promise of millions, not because they have a kick ass album in their heads they need to get out. The "creative" days are way over.

THANK YOU!!! Aerosmith is the worst!!! Everytime a summer blockbuster movie comes out (Armagedon) they do a song for it. Their songs sound like commercials....did you see that dodge commercial they did??? They are fricken garbage!!

Yeah, and I wonder how long it will be before Metallica makes the leap into soundtrack music. It can't be far off.

That's why all great bands need to end it early. Some of the best ever had either someone die or they broke up in their prime. They went out before they had the chance to "evolve" into something made for radio - before their retirements became a primary concern.

I get it, hell I may do the same myself, but I don't have to like it.

There's only so much creativity inside someone before they become to affected by the business.

Think of it like the movies. Why does (almost) every sequel to a great movie suck - because someones ideas are spent and now they're trying to cash in on a previous success.

...or something....now I'm just ranting.

Uh MI2 anyone

no but if they worry about it, they ar enot an artist... take bad religion for example.. they make a living at it, but have never given in to commercialization

I seem to recall that up until the Black album Metallica had a raw deal with Elektra. Even though all of their albums were gold or platinum they were making dick on royalties. So they put out the "One" video, became more commercially viable, watered the sound down a little and hit the mainstream a few seconds before "grunge" takes off. In the wake of that happening, they get a much bigger fanbase. They were sick of not getting paid like a band of their magnitude should. I think that's where their anti-Napster shit came from. Wouldn't you be sick of getting ripped off?
That being said, I think most of the stuff since and partially including the black album sucks pretty hard. They've changed there sound to be reminiscent of whatever's hot at the time (much like the Who back in the day) and all of the mugging and "fuck you" posturing won't change the fact that they're artistically inert. They can still play the fuck out of their instruments and sound like Metallica - it's just that the music isn't original anymore.
Working with Bob Rock for years is a bad idea, too.

well Bob Rock in my mind is the Anti Christ... i mean lets be honest he helped Kill Metallica...

But they had to do it deliberately, especialy considering his list of producing/engineer Credits leading up to the black album includes:
Aerosmith- Permanent Vacation
Bon Jovi- Slippery When Wet
Cher- Love Hurts
David Lee Roth- A Little Ain't Enough
Loverboy- Loverboy
Loverboy- Wildside
Loverboy- Big Ones

the heaviest music he did prior to destroying metallica was Krokus- The Blitz.

His list afterwards is almost as scary, Brian Adams, Varuca Salt.

needless to say if you are a relentlessy heavy band, who wants to become watered down main stream rock, a good choice for Producer is a guy who's most recent Production credit prior to producing you is Mötley Crüe- Dr. Feelgood.

Anyone who says Metallica Didn't sell out forgets this little fact and must Think Aerosmith, Bon Jovi, Cher, David Lee Roth, Loverboy and motely crue are true artists as well.

BOB ROCK IS DEFINITELY THE ANTICHRIST.

At least in the spectrum of this discussion, anyway. He actually played bass on the new album. They picked up that cat from Ozzy's band afterwards.

Of course they knew what they were doing. They cashed in on their integrity. That's the worst.

On a side note - here's an article by indie diehard Steve Albini that originally ran in the Chicago Reader about how a lot of up and coming bands can get screwed by the music biz. Not really on topic but helps to put yourself in the shoes of someone who has the option to "sell out" or not.
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

Not true. I'm a visual artist and I worry about food and bills all the time. If I can't eat then I can't create. If I can't pay the mortgage then I don't have a place to sleep. Artist's have the same concerns that non-artists do.

People seem to think that in order to be an artist one must struggle. CRAP! In order to be an artist one must only pick up a tool and be creative with it. Like I said earlier, art is the marriage between creative thought and technical skill. The better of both and the better the art.

You (generally speaking to all XOCers) guys are assuming that some record exec sat Metallica down and told them to change their style. I don't believe that for one second. I believe that Metallica, like all great musicians needed to experiment. Experimentation can be good or bad. That's why it's labeled experimentation. Just because you don't like the "new" Metallica sound doesn't mean that they sold out to some higher power. It just means that they, for whatever reason, decided to switch things up.

Do you really think that Metallica would risk everything they worked for to make some yuppy record exec happy? C'mon! To believe they risked their credibility in the Metal scene and the dollars that their fans spend to follow some record exec's whim is silly. Not to mention, dumb!

I read posts earlier about how people stopped liking Metallica because of the roll they played in the Napster ordeal. I guess it's ok for people to steal from musicians, right? I guess it would be ok for me to steal from you? Right? Now, I believe that the recording industry extorts money from the artists and fans but to resort to stealing is petty. I'm no thief, my mother raised me better than that. (In the old west it was frowned upon - and if you did it too much it was uncool- to kill another man but if you stole somebody's horse you were hanged. Hmmmm!)

Art is subjective and everyone has an opinion. I don't mind someone saying that they don't like the new sound that Metallica has to offer. That's cool. But to make outrageous claims like "they sold out" or "they're just posers" is WHACK! They are who they are. Like 'em or not.

I just recently heard the song St Anger on the radio. I must say, coming from a recording and musical backround, it is the worst sounding recording i have ever heard Metalica do. The drums sound terrible, the snare sounds like it was recorded with a speak and spell, the guitars are washy and muddy, the vocals sound muted. It sounds like a kid in 6th grade shop class recorded it in his basement with an old sony boom box. Very disapointing. PLus, the song wasnt that good either.

Well you figure with their last work, they put a cd of crap out knowing that they could sucker everyone into buying it because they are Metallica.

Now they prolly spent 50k on making a bad garage sounding cd to know they will make over 50 mil on it, again suckering the public into buying it just because they are Metallica

ok I will try and explain this one more time... If an artist comprimises their "art" for the payday... they are not an aritist anymore. True art is not a comprimise the way metallicas music is since they decided they needed bob rock to make them more mainstream and accessible

Bob Rock produced that song? Damn, he should never work again. I would be embarrassed to release something that sounded that ridiculously poor.

not only did he produce the new metallica and every metallica album since(and including) the bacl album... he also played bass on the new record.

Boys, I have listened to a few tracks off of this album now. I WILL be buying it. It is too good to not buy. Pretty heavy. Is it hardcore? Nah, but it's heavy ass shit. I like.

By the way, is it just me, or is Ride the Lightning the most unbelievable kick ass song of all time?

Did they record this album on an answering machine? The sound SUCKS. Some of the songs mildly pass for "Metallica", but mostly this album is pretty bad. They should change the name of the tour to Summer Crapitarium.

You dont listen to much Death Metal do you? On another note, personally "in my opinion" I like the new album and like always Metallica has come out with a new sound that makes the audience question. Some other good bands.

Acid Bath
Nevermore
Black Label Society
Death

For all of you metallica haters out there, I have a simple solution for you: If you dont like it, stay away from it.

You see, I like Mettalica, I have been listening to them since you were probably in diapers. Somebody royally fucked up in the recording of thier new record in my opinion. It does sound like it was recorded with an answering machine, especially the drums and guitars. The snare sound is farty, the guitars sound washy and undefined. There is no "bigness" like in previous records. The vocals are buried, and the bass sound is muddy and lacks clarity.

So I dont like it, I WILL stay away from it, and listen to the other Mettalica records that DO sound good.

Since when was Metallica death metal?????

The death metal comment was added because of where he had noted that the album sounded like it had been recorded on an ansewring machine. That is all.

But that still doesnt explain, why saying it sounded like it was recorded on an answering machine has anything to do with death metal?

I took it to mean overall recording "craft" for lack of a better word. It has nothing to do with the songs, and everything to do with the "sonic" quality of the recording itself. I would be embarrassed if a recording left my studio sounding like that. Bottom line, it just aint mixed right.

Exactly, the sonic quality is what I was referring to. And no, I don't listen to much death metal mainly because I'm not living in my parents basement and don't believe that stomping on a distortion pedal qualifies as talent. My guess is they recorded all or most of it straight to a hard disk.

i like(d) Metallica. saw them back in '91, and to this day it's one of the best shows i've ever seen.

but musically, "St. Anger" is SHIT. lyrically (though i'm not really sure i can comprehend enough to say this), "St. Anger" is SHIT.

and i can't stay away from it. the radio stations here (owned by the same 2 companies that own most large-to-medium markets) play the fucking song every hour and a half. even worse, in the interim, they play every RHCP song released in the last 8 years (all bad), and every song out that is Creed, sounds like Creed, or tries to sound like Creed.

I think this is a really good review that was posted on another board I read -- I have never heard this DJ, but he makes some good points. It's kinda long but I think it is very interesting...

Julie

From the afternoon DJ at www.ROCK1057.net (named whiplash)

Metallica's St. Anger is 75 minutes of aggression, violence, chaos and brutality. It's an electrical meltdown wrapped inside a nuclear explosion surrounded by a 500 mile earthquake. On this, we all concur.

From here, we become less agreeable…

After listening to the album twice in its entirety, I'll state my conclusion now…then spend several paragraphs explaining it…then I'll state the conclusion again:

This is either the worst dumpster-full of rotten, spoiled garbage Metallica has ever written…or it's brilliantly groundbreaking. But there is no middle ground. This album isn't "okay." After hearing it twice, it either sucks or it's phenomenal.

I suppose I'll begin by touching on - and agreeing with - all the negatives about which I've heard others chanting. First, someone wake up Kirk Hammett and tell him his band's recording a new album. His alarm clock has been broken for the last 6 months. Where's Kirk! You've got (arguably) the greatest metal guitarist plugging in next to you, and as a reward for all his years of jaw-dropping, neck-shredding, light speed distorted dominance, you give him a grand total of… ZERO solos? What the f*** guys? In every song, there is at least 2 places where Kirk could just lift off…but we get nothing. Maybe it was Kirk's decision…in which case he should be flogged. Maybe it was Bob Rock's decision…in which case he should be drawn and quartered. Most likely it was a collective decision. Now since we can't execute the whole quartet, I'll guess I'll just shake my head and move on.

Secondly, everyone complains about the quality…the production…the mixing…the overall Bob Rocked sound on the record. I agree with the criticisms. St. Anger sounds like it was recorded for less than $1,000 on an 8 track in my friend's sheet metal garage. Maybe Lars really is broke from Napster, but don't Metallica have access to a multi-million dollar recording studio with top notch equipment and an unlimited budget? And let's be honest about Bob Rock…the guy knows his stuff. Dr. Feelgood sounded great. The Black Album was amazingly produced. Bob didn't suddenly go deaf. You have to believe it was intentional…but why? I'll get to my theory…

Also, in the mix, the drums are WAY too loud. All you can hear is Lars banging on that tin can. The guitars (what little there are) are buried behind "Tama garage fury," as I will now call it.

As for James' vocals…they're rough. They're raw. It sounds like he did one take and kept it no matter how it sounded. No overdubs, either. I remember watching A Year & a Half in the Life Of…which documented the recording of the Black Album…and Bob Rock made James sing "…and I dub thee Unforgiven" about 40 different times, keeping every take and overdubbing those vocals until they sounded thick and perfect. What a difference 12 years makes… James is thin, often out-of-key, often missing notes, his voice cracks occasionally. I almost started laughing during the Frantic-tic-tic-tock part of that song it was so out-of-key and warbling.

And as for the songs themselves…everyone I've talked to says the same thing: "the whole album is the same, repetitive song." It's true, all the songs sound alike. And yes, all the songs are repetitive, lyrically and musically. The songwriting and arrangement are incredibly subpar compared to past Metallica efforts. Random, pointless time changes litter St. Anger. And several of the songs even start out in the tradition of newer hard rock songs, meaning they play the riff softly, then break into it hardcore. (Think Linkin Park's One Step Closer or Godsmack's I Stand Alone.) It's very typical and, therefore, uncharacteristic of Metallica.

I think that's about it, right? Have I covered all the reasons why most people think this album tanks?

Alright, now for the flipside…think about this…

Lars warned us for weeks that this record would blow our minds. Critics who heard it early said it was commercial suicide. They would lose all their new Black Album and beyond fans, and their old school fans would be jaded by the lack of creativity, harmony, and guitar solos that were so prevalent on the first 3 albums. Critically, Metallica couldn't win. We've heard this for months.

My first point: we shouldn't ACT so surprised with what we hear. That said, it's easy to say "oh, yeah…I'm ready for anything," and then you're presented with St. Anger and your preparation goes out the dirty window because you can't believe your ears.

But here's my big theory on why this album just might be brilliance in disguise…

Metallica have always been anti-glam. Lars has always described them as the anti-Motley Crue. They've always gone against the grain, forcing their heaviness down the pop-driven throat of the world. But remember in the late 80s and early 90s when glam was at its peak? Bands like the Crue, Skid Row, Posion, etc. ruled the music scene with their sex, drugs and party attitude accompanied by their teased hair, caked make-up, spandex, leather, lipstick and enough hairspray to make any drag queen proud.

At the time, that was the standard, and everyone did it…

Then along came a band wearing flannel. Their lead singer couldn't sing like Sebastian Bach. He looked liked a bum. His name was Kurt. He didn't use hairspray. He had a band called Nirvana. They could rock too, but they said the hell with this false image. They stripped everything down…naked…rock n roll, depressing lyrics and ripped clothes. And grunge was born.

Ten years later, Nirvana is credited with launching a revolution and igniting the hairspray into a flaming glam-wildfire…

So what has happened in the 10 years post-Nirvana? Other bands have come and gone. Grunge had its run. Then when hip-hop took off, suddenly rap rock was thrust upon us…Rage Against the Machine. Kid Rock. Limp Bizkit. 311. Technology improved dramatically. Bands like these started using turntables in their sets and on their albums. More crazy sound effects were incorporated in hard rock. Nine Inch Nails, Marilyn Manson and Rob Zombie pioneered the industrial techno-metal. Korn uses drum machines on their albums. It's all programmed to sound perfect. Other metal outfits like Iron Maiden and Iced Earth use big orchestras, pianos, voice distortions. Linkin Park uses the digital muting and computerized beats. Guitars are compressed, vocals are overdubbed. It's technology gone wild to produce the most "perfect-sounding" rock records possible.

At this time, it is the standard, and everyone does it…

Then along comes a band we know very well. They've gone through a lot in the past few years. They've lost their bassist. They've been tangled in unpopular lawsuits. Their front man was in rehab for alcoholism. They can still rock too…but they said the hell with this false image that "hi-tech is best." So they stripped everything down…naked…heavy metal, angry lyrics. Raw. No technology. No effects. No orchestra. No drum machine. No vocal overdubs. And St. Anger was born.

They say things move in cycles. In "83, Kill "Em All wasn't popular. It was raw. It was basic thrash metal. Very good thrash metal…but it was simple. Now in "03, twenty years later, Metallica have gone full circle. St. Anger is simple. And although not as creative as the debut, it's more like that record than any other.

So by this analogy (the same way that Nirvana was anti-glam, St. Anger is anti-technology), is Metallica's new CD fresh and ground-breaking? Or is it more a return to roots? Given the cyclic nature of things, can it be both?

If this album is brilliant, it's because it was written by a band that could have done something else. They have the money. They have the talent. They have the resources and the best producer in the world. They CHOSE to make St. Anger the way it is, and they did it on purpose. They see how hi-tech hard rock and heavy metal is becoming…so they put out a record that was completely the opposite. They put out a record that was about music…about feelings…about deep emotions. Not one about how many cool samples and effects we can mix together with our budget. St. Anger is a human record. It's raw. It's imperfect. It's real. It's…human.

Isn't it refreshing to hear a human record in such a computerized world?

I think so…

And the more I think about it, the more this idea seems brilliantly groundbreaking. Maybe the songs themselves aren't spectacular, but the POINT they make, from their production quality to their content give the album an amazing cohesion…a unity that gives modern techo-rock the finger. Actually, St. Anger pretty much gives everything the finger.

But here's the kicker…

It could be said that any garage band from Peoria could make a record that sounds like the new Metallica CD. Why aren't they considered groundbreaking in their stripped-down, simple philosophy? Well, because our Peoria garage band is poor. Their record HAS to sound naked. And they have no history. Metallica has 20 years of legacy and expectations. And for Metallica to do this by choice, gives the idea its appeal. It had to be the right band at the right time…and Metallica stepped up to the plate to carry the torch.

So if I'm right…if this album is brilliant, does it represent the future of hard rock? Will it have that much influence? Or does the public still want more years of super techo computerized ultra produced rock that showcases megabytes and digitalia instead of talent and songwriting?

I don't know…

Now the conclusion again. This album is either a serious mistake and the biggest load of crap Metallica ever penned…or it's brilliant and could change the sound of hard rock for the next 10 years.

Think about it…I'm gonna go listen to the CD again because I have a feeling it's really, really good.

Whiplash

Talk about a CYA opinion. The album is SHIT! Not maybe it's SHIT.....just plain SHIT!

I'm starting to believe that the government funded this album (all $7 of it's budget) to add to their collection of interrogation CD's. Barney's effectiveness must be wearing off.

They still hold "The Band formerly known as Metallica" title for me.

these guys just plain sucked. i used to play their music when i was in high school. long hair the whole bit. but when they sold out with the black album, i quit. things just got worse as the time drug on. when they cut their hair and the shit with lars and napster. fuck them. i play drums myself and i can play drums to alot of their old songs. he used to be my idol. fuck him now. he is a lame old man now. what a piece of shit. they just need to throw in the towel. two more words----metallica=GARBAGE

FIN

I love this CD. I've been listening to it off and on for about a week now.

I think Frantic, Monster, Invisible Kid, and Shoot Me Again are great. And some of the other tracks are probably good too, but I haven't given them fair time yet because I keep skipping to those four.

I've been reading through this thread. Two things strike me odd.

1) This thread started as an off-topic on this board, and it is relatively lengthy, but it has not turned into a fight about religion or politics, or name calling, which is rare. Could it be that music is a respected difference, or is it that just the real bitches aren't chiming in to this particular thread?

2) Why do a lot of people think that the stuff that Metallica does at this day and age has to sound like "Ride The Lightening" to be considered good?

To those people: the early Metallica was great stuff, but so is their other stuff. Why can't they change? Their old stuff is their yardstick? In my opinion, their later work, and their most recent, doesn't suck, it's just different. Why are you latched on to just those four albums? Music is much broader than that. Do you think that Megadeth sucks? What about Bad Company? What about Satriani? David Sanborn? Rush? Chicago? 311? Enya? What about ZZ Top? They're commercial. I don't get it.

Somebody said something about Metallica cutting their hair. You think Metallica cut their hair way back when to become more “mainstream”? Maybe they did, so what? That makes their music bad? I used to have long hair but I cut it and now my hair is short. I did it because it became a pain in the ass and it was hot. Now it's not.

You know, some of you sound kind of like this, “down with commercialization, man, down with the establishment, man, that shit keeps us down, man, they're trying to take our freedom, man, music's got to be free, man.” You sound like the hippy on that episode of the Simpsons (Ned Flanders' dad). OK, I know, you're probably not a hippy. You're a person that likes metal (okay, only “non-commercial” metal, right?). But you sound purposefully anti-something, and almost to a fault, much in the same way as the hippy. To those that don't relate fully, it's amusing. That's why it was on the Simpsons.

I have an old girlfriend that likes only “dance music”. Nothing else. It has to have a dance beat, a disco-y sound, to be good. She doesn't like anything else. I feel sorry for her when she can't get into any of the other types of music that I listen to. All of her radio stations are tuned to talk and news stations.