Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › How good is early Metallica!?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How good is early Metallica!? - Page 2

post #16 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Austin 3:16 View Post
I also like the Black album, Kill 'em All, and Garage, Inc.
X2
post #17 of 56
From "Ride The Lightning" to "...And Justice For All" they were awesome - and I'm not much of a heavy metal fan to begin with. Their "Black" album turned me off them for good.

It did have some good songs on it that were different from their previous material, but overall it just didn't have much of an impact - they lost that aggressive edge they had previously.

Hetfield went from playing these ridiculously, brutally fast chord progressions (I thought he had bionic wrist - all down strokes!!) to playing like Keith Richards (Sandman).

Same with Ulrich who displayed a more dynamic and somewhat intricate style on the previous albums and then started playing like that one-armed Def Leppard guy.
post #18 of 56
Oh and they lost points for me when Hetfield started singing as opposed to screaming.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate good vocals but their music didn't call for it. Him "crooning" took more of the edge off their music.

The "new voice" did work on the ballads though. Still, nothing beats "master!...MASTER!!!!!"
post #19 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relayer71 View Post
Same with Ulrich who displayed a more dynamic and somewhat intricate style on the previous albums and then started playing like that one-armed Def Leppard guy.
ROFL, that just made my day. Cruel, but hilarious.
post #20 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fungi View Post
ROFL, that just made my day. Cruel, but hilarious.
It may be cruel, but it's absolutely true
post #21 of 56
I really think Metallica is extremely overrated.

Sure, they may have played a part in shaping thrash metal. Cirith Ungol and others were making more innovative, thrashier metal back in '81-'82 that was IMO better than Metallica. You are just scraping the bottom of the barrel. If you want other thrash suggestions, go get some Exumer, Dark Angel, Kreator, or Morbid Saint.
post #22 of 56
It was pretty good I guess, and when I was younger I loved it, but nowadays it just seems like such simple metal. Almost every guitar solo is an E-minor pentatonic scale that pretty much never goes outside the box. The drumming is very elementary, but the production really saves the day many a time. Dont get me wrong, when I was 13-14 and just cutting my teeth as a musician, these albums could not be improved upon in my opinion, I thought metallica were the most gifted musicians on earth, but looking back on them now is just not the same.
post #23 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdeadfolx View Post
It was pretty good I guess, and when I was younger I loved it, but nowadays it just seems like such simple metal. Almost every guitar solo is an E-minor pentatonic scale that pretty much never goes outside the box. The drumming is very elementary, but the production really saves the day many a time. Dont get me wrong, when I was 13-14 and just cutting my teeth as a musician, these albums could not be improved upon in my opinion, I thought metallica were the most gifted musicians on earth, but looking back on them now is just not the same.
Interesting point.
I used to feel similar to you, but having just sat down and listened to these three albums in their entirety, if anything it reminded me of how brilliant and original these albums were, regardless of simplicity relative to todays music.
Naturally, do to the emmense amount of progression within metal over the past 15-20 years (and the tremendous talents that have arisen as a result), its getting harder to correlate the musicianship of todays comlex music giants (IMO: Meshuggah, Opeth, ISIS, Nuerosis, etc.) to the pioneers of the past.
However, for me-its interesting to note how far the music has come, how much of an influence Metallica had and has on the bands of today and most importantly, how their first 3-4 efforts have really stood the test of time.
post #24 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by SonicArmada View Post
I really think Metallica is extremely overrated.

Sure, they may have played a part in shaping thrash metal. Cirith Ungol and others were making more innovative, thrashier metal back in '81-'82 that was IMO better than Metallica. You are just scraping the bottom of the barrel. If you want other thrash suggestions, go get some Exumer, Dark Angel, Kreator, or Morbid Saint.
Some decent bands on that list(big ups on the cirith ungol rec.) However, the other bands are probably too close to death metal for most 'lica fans here.

If anyone here wants to listen to what the album after Master of Puppets should have sounded like you need to check out "Victims of Deception" by Heathen.
YouTube - Heathen Mercy Is No Virtue
post #25 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by citywithoutmetal View Post
Some decent bands on that list(big ups on the cirith ungol rec.) However, the other bands are probably too close to death metal for most 'lica fans here.

If anyone here wants to listen to what the album after Master of Puppets should have sounded like you need to check out "Victims of Deception" by Heathen.
YouTube - Heathen Mercy Is No Virtue
Thanks for the tip - I'll check that out.

To me, death metal and thrash metal have different functions. I find thrash to be more "party music", very fitting for a night with beer, friends and headbanging. Death is usually more intense and brutal, better fitted for a concentrated listening experience. Of course they're not that strictly separated, but this is the general tendency for me. It really depends on the mood.

I prefer black metal over both, though
post #26 of 56
I came to know Metallica from their Black Album, and went backwards, then Load, Reload, Garage, etc. Guess I'm in the minority here, but I love the black album. Its not the most original or bleeding edge work, I'll admit, but it has a certain sound to it that is on none of their other albums. I think it achieves the goal set forth by Bob Rock; to record the band with good sound. I've heard better sounding discs, no doubt, but for Rock music, I think its a pretty solid effort.
I'm sure there is some sentimentalism involved, but I will always love that album. I do have times where I don't listen to it for months, but when I return to it, its like discovering it all over again.

I also don't agree with the common belief that change means bad. So what if its not the most pure thrash album? It is what it is. Musicians are artists, and artists are never going to design their art to fit someone else's designs or molds. It is about personal expression. I think that is the completely wrong way to look at music, or any art form. Each piece can stand on its own. Whatever Justice sounds like, it should have no bearing on The Black Album. Whatever the Black Album sounds like, it should have no bearing on Load. And so on.
post #27 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama View Post
I came to know Metallica from their Black Album, and went backwards, then Load, Reload, Garage, etc.
I also did this. While I liked Black Album then, I soon realized it was very dull when compared to the earlier albums. Of course, opinions vary

Quote:
Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama View Post
Musicians are artists, and artists are never going to design their art to fit someone else's designs or molds. It is about personal expression. I think that is the completely wrong way to look at music, or any art form. Each piece can stand on its own. Whatever Justice sounds like, it should have no bearing on The Black Album. Whatever the Black Album sounds like, it should have no bearing on Load. And so on.
This is very true, and I agree with you in principle. But although some people might bash Metallica purely for changing their sound, I believe it is the nature of the change which makes it unacceptable for so many. Progress is often a good thing, but if the progress consists of playing boring riffs, singing in a style that doesn't fit the music, watering down the impact and aggressiveness, and in general opting for a more radio-friendly approach, I'd rather have them stop making music altogether.
post #28 of 56
Yeah I experienced metallica backwards. I started with The black album then heard some load and reload stuff. They fell of the map for me then I got all their older stuff. "And Justice for All" probably has more plays then any of the older albums for me. Master of Puppets is second, Ride the Lightning third, and I just don't really like kill em' all. Their older stuff seems so much more progressive then all the modern rock/metal stuff they do and other band mimic.

"And justice for all" did so much more for me then "master of puppets". I love metallica for what they have done, but I wish they went less commercial to a more progressive route the way radiohead did. They make music for themselves and I love how I will still have those old albums.
post #29 of 56
Quote:
I really think Metallica is extremely overrated.

Sure, they may have played a part in shaping thrash metal. Cirith Ungol and others were making more innovative, thrashier metal back in '81-'82 that was IMO better than Metallica. You are just scraping the bottom of the barrel. If you want other thrash suggestions, go get some Exumer, Dark Angel, Kreator, or Morbid Saint.

Kreator's Pleasure To Kill + Morbid Saint's Spectrum Of Death > anything Metallica has done, I agree. However, while still pure thrash those two are on the way more violent form of thrash, not that far from Thrash influended Deathmetal like early Malevolent Creation. Dark Angel is mixed feeling for me, some excellent tracks, some crap tracks. Never heard Exumer.

*edit* However, Metallica is lyrically more... intelligent. While I dont usually give a damn, Kreator has never been known for their lyrics, where-as Metallica - Ride The Lightning has some excellent lyrical content, and its other thrash albums arent bad either.

*edit* Just heard Exumer on myspace (fan-site?), thats some pretty badass Thrash!
MySpace.com - Exumer - Frankfurt am Main - Thrash / Metal - www.myspace.com/exumer1984
post #30 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by SR-71Panorama View Post
I also don't agree with the common belief that change means bad. So what if its not the most pure thrash album? It is what it is. Musicians are artists, and artists are never going to design their art to fit someone else's designs or molds. It is about personal expression. I think that is the completely wrong way to look at music, or any art form. Each piece can stand on its own. Whatever Justice sounds like, it should have no bearing on The Black Album. Whatever the Black Album sounds like, it should have no bearing on Load. And so on.
I totally understand what you are saying and agree.

But in their case it wasn't a gradual progression but a completely jarring change in styles from one album to the next. This wasn't a band known for experimenting and trying different sounds - the first 3 or 4 albums were pretty much in the same vein/genre and it was why many fans liked them - then came the Black album which was just too different.

But for me personally it wasn't so much the new sound - I listen to many different artists, my last few purchased albums were by Guided By Voices, Miles Davis, Labradford, Belle And Sebastian and Mastodon (first true heavy metal purchase since, well the Black album, lol - and "Leviathan" kicks ass!) and I actually think "The Unforgiven" is a well written/performed song and one of the few I still remember - it was just that most of the album sounded too generic and just dull.

To me early Metallica albums were fun to listen too, all that energy was contagious and made you want to run and jump around screaming along, hehe. The songs on the Black album just made you want to tap your foot lightly
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Music
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Music › How good is early Metallica!?