Metallica Superthread -All Metallica discussion goes in here

nyarlothothep

Lithium93_ wrote: »

Underrated gem in my opinion.

The bass riff is mean

Mental Mickey

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Really?!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Metallica/comments/8ijwx6/ronnie_is_it_actually_based_on_a_true_story/

https://www.songfacts.com/facts/metallica/ronnie

Mental Mickey

The only good thing about Ronnie is the riff

Mental Mickey

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I really quite like the snare on St Anger, it's the last album in which Metallica pushed themselves. The drums sound almost sharp- crisp on Hardwired, the snare and kick are really bright.

Not the snare again!? Jaaaysus

nyarlothothep

Mental Mickey wrote: »

Not the snare again!? Jaaaysus

I've always thought that for some reason the snare and Lars don't sit quite right together. The ultimate snare sound would be from MoP or RTL. People really go in for the snare on St Anger but it's obvious he was going for the Californian punk snare sound, No Doubt and Blink 182 used a similar sound a lot.

Degag

I actually don't mind the snare on it either. Fcuk it..... it was something different.

The vitriol some people spew about it sometimes is laughable really.

jack presley

If the songs were any good, the sound of the snare might not have been as big an issue as it was.

Degag

Ah, it has some good moments. The title song and Frantic sound really good live recently. There are absolutely some duds on there and most of the songs just go on far too long but it has some great riffs in there and in fairness is proper heavy

The problem is it just doesn't hold up with the earlier stuff; i.e. if it wasn't a Metallica album it wouldn't get as much stick

Mental Mickey

jack presley wrote: »

If the songs were any good, the sound of the snare might not have been as big an issue as it was.

Songs were awful

Lithium93_

St. Anger, the album that'll cause arguments between Metallica fans until the end of time :pac:

Church on Tuesday

sugarman wrote: »

There's some half decent riffs on St Anger that with a bit of tweaking could have been good songs. Lose the kettle drum snare, tune to half a step, add some solos and shorten some needlessly long songs and it would have sounded closer to Death Magnetic.

By far the worst fault of St Anger for me, is the absolutely diabolical lyrics throughout.

It's ultimately a product of it's time.

Let's be honest here; James was not in a very good place still after rehab and it's actually kinda ballsy to come out of that and then go 'alright, let's finish this album we are clearly struggling to write and complete in the first instance'.

The band was burnt out at that point and so was some of the members. Relentless touring will catch up with you eventually. St. Anger has some great ideas but it's an unfocused mess for the most part and dated, correctly as Kirk stated in SKOM, to the early 00's Nu Metal sound, even though that movement itself was dying a slow death at that time which kinda makes it worse.

Some decent tunes all the same; All Within My Hands is great I think.

jack presley

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

James was not in a very good place

Definitely not. Did you see the dungarees he was wearing?

scudzilla

Found this little doozy on youtube the other day, this was my first standalone Metallica gig (not including a secret gig), went down to London 2 days later and seen them twice at Hammersmith.
Remember this Manchester gig so well, meeting Lars in city centre, he was on a street corner waiting for a taxi. Getting my justice lp signed by kirk and Jason after gig.
Now they remove seats for Manchester Apollo gigs but for some reason this was an all seated gig. A few mates left 30mins before end to catch last train home, i stayed on and kipped in Picaddilly station over night.

Love these types of bootlegs, not amazing quality but the atmosphere comes ripping through.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqEu4yZrTMo

Granadino

Remember the bloke on O Connell bridge in Dub selling the bootlegs? My first gig was Metallica in the Point in 92, and I remember going down to buy the bootleg the day after before going back to Limerick. Mates had the Top Hat gigs, and some other metal gigs. Crap quality, but you could feel the vibe.... God bless YT now with the live vids.

Mental Mickey

jack presley wrote: »

Definitely not. Did you see the dungarees he was wearing?

Looked like a lumberjack

dasdog

Granadino wrote: »

Remember the bloke on O Connell bridge in Dub selling the bootlegs? My first gig was Metallica in the Point in 92, and I remember going down to buy the bootleg the day after before going back to Limerick. Mates had the Top Hat gigs, and some other metal gigs. Crap quality, but you could feel the vibe.... God bless YT now with the live vids.

A better option is go directly to bootleg sites. I trawled through some of them about ten years ago and got some really good quality direct from the soundboard recordings. Metallica "1985-03-15 - Kabuki Theater, San Francisco" being one. Have the Top Hat and SFX gigs from here but they are not great. Slightly off topic but I got about 25 Thin Lizzy bootlegged gigs, some awful but some would just need production to be approaching release standard.

greenspurs

dasdog wrote: »

A better option is go directly to bootleg sites. I trawled through some of them about ten years ago and got some really good quality direct from the soundboard recordings. Metallica "1985-03-15 - Kabuki Theater, San Francisco" being one. Have the Top Hat and SFX gigs from here but they are not great. Slightly off topic but I got about 25 Thin Lizzy bootlegged gigs, some awful but some would just need production to be approaching release standard.

what sites would one search if they so wanted to search ?

jack presley

Nice pro-shot footage of the entire Trondheim gig uploaded

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

nyarlothothep

Lithium93_ wrote: »

St. Anger, the album that'll cause arguments between Metallica fans until the end of time :pac:

That's quite an achievement in itself

Lithium93_

nyarlothothep wrote: »

That's quite an achievement in itself

But is it better than the collaboration album with the late Lou Reed? :pac:

Church on Tuesday

Lithium93_ wrote: »

But is it better than the collaboration album with the late Lou Reed? :pac:

Lulu wasn't a Metallica album though, it was a Lou Reed record with Metallica guesting.

Most Metallica fans hate that record because they simply weren't prepared for Lou Reed levels of weirdness.

nyarlothothep

Lithium93_ wrote: »

But is it better than the collaboration album with the late Lou Reed? :pac:

But it gave us "I am the table".

Church on Tuesday wrote:

Lulu wasn't a Metallica album though, it was a Lou Reed record with Metallica guesting.

Most Metallica fans hate that record because they simply weren't prepared for Lou Reed levels of weirdness.

That in itself was an achievement also.

Wrongway1985

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Lulu wasn't a Metallica album though, it was a Lou Reed record with Metallica guesting.

Released on Metallica's record label

Church on Tuesday

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

Released on Metallica's record label

Reed seemingly was on subsidiary record labels by the late 00's, Lulu would not have seen the light of day if it didn't come out on WB/Vertigo.

Conceptually and in parts musically it is absolutley a Lou Reed record.

I like it for what it is and when it came out it just became popular to hate on it.

It's a flawed but intriguing record; St Anger was the sound of a band trying to return to their roots in a disjointed and now very dated sounding way.

Wrongway1985

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

St Anger was the sound of a band trying to return to their roots in a disjointed and now very dated sounding way.

Nah it was an aging band trying to somehow bag a spot in the nu-metal era, dropping solos, still not playing thrash metal and incorporating pots and pans as drums was not going back to their roots.

Church on Tuesday

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

Nah it was an aging band trying to somehow bag a spot in the nu-metal era, dropping solos, still not playing thrash metal and incorporating pots and pans as drums was not going back to their roots.

Yeah, that's why is sounds as dated as it does.

They wanted to bring the original aggression back to the music, hence the title, but it mostly came off as contrived.

jack presley

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

when it came out it just became popular to hate on it

Or alternatively, people hated on it because it isn’t any good.

I doubt there are many, if any at all, who liked it but said they hated it because it was the popular thing to say.

funnyname

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

pots and pans as drums

Brilliant, take a bow!

Church on Tuesday

jack presley wrote: »

Or alternatively, people hated on it because it isn’t any good.

I doubt there are many, if any at all, who liked it but said they hated it because it was the popular thing to say.

Er... I would very much doubt that too.

nyarlothothep

I wouldn't call it dated in the respect that everything is dated from its inception. Like what gives one decade/generation the standard to judge previous ones as dated? I like the pots and pans drums, original and annoying.