Guest CoreyLazarus416 Report post Posted April 19, 2003 Sorry, but "Bleeding Me" owns everything Slayer's written post-Seasons. As for the Reign In Blood vs. Master Of Puppets comment you made, I say this in support of Metallica: Which album produced more classics? You can point to Puppets and name no less than 4 classic songs. "Battery." "Master Of Puppets." "Welcome Home (Sanitarium)." "Orion." You point to Reign In Blood, however, and you get 2 classics. "Angel Of Death." "Raining Blood." Add to that the fact that only one song Puppets sounds like filler, "The Thing That Should Not Be," whereas every song between "Angel Of Death" and "Raining Blood" is practically filler on Reign In Blood (save for the last 45 seconds or so of "Post Mortem," as that song leads directly into the title track, per se). Nothing stands out at all during the space between Reign's opening and closing tracks. So, 4/5 of the album is filler. 1/8 of Puppets is filler. And since we all know that it's better to produce quality substance than just filler, Puppets gets the nod. More complete album, more pivotal album, more historic metal album. Might not be as heavy or as fast or maybe even as fun to listen to sometimes, but it's the better album. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Agent of Oblivion Report post Posted April 19, 2003 I can't understand, even not being a real fan of Maiden, how you can say they were more technical. The earlier albums from Metallica I agree. But Puppets and Justice were very technical. This is where we are just different, so I will agree to disagree. But Dave sucked as a singer. He was a very great songwriter and if he'd kept his nose off of the mirror, Metallica would have been great, there was no jealousy there. I think Dave just imitated Metallica. Metallica was first and Dave got kicked out and started Megadeath, trying to be like Metallica. I don't think Metallica ripped anybody off... I'm not a huge fan of Maiden, but I've heard a decent amount of their material. It doesn't take much to see that Bruce Dickinson is 1000 times the singer that Hetfield is, and the extensive solos completely destroy anything Hammet has done. Mustaine's voice sounds pretty strained and edgy, but that's the whole point. It matches the music perfectly. He also played a big part of the band creatively early on, so it stands to reason that their sounds would be similar. As they move apart in time though, the material sounds much different. Aside from Load and Risk. They both blatantly fell on their faces at almost the exact same time with that shit. Bands Metallica ripped off: (In alphabetical order) 1.Black Sabbath 2.Misfits 3.Motorhead Not in a sense with specific riffs or songs, but in terms of their sound. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CoreyLazarus416 Report post Posted April 19, 2003 Yeah, because blatantly SAYING those bands heavily influenced them is, I guess, admitting you copied them. In which case, no band has ever been original...EVER. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Agent of Oblivion Report post Posted April 19, 2003 I'm not saying there are no original bands at all, Just that Metallica admits to totally aping the sound of those three influences. I mean, it's not like that's just "Grr, I don't like metallica so HAH" material, They genuinely borrow generously from their influences, and it's easy to tell. Why not take an influence and do something different with it? For example. Sabbath was influenced by the Beatles, yet sound nothing like them. Same with Tool and King Crimson, among others. Standing out as great means standing out from your influences, as well as the bands they themselves influence. Metallica hardly does that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest saturnmark4life Report post Posted April 19, 2003 I think it's clear that no-ones ever gonna move on this whole 'tallica thing. I agree with Corey that Load was a great album, and I don't think they're quite horrible yet, but AoO's points are all valid, and he likes primus. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest AndrewTS Report post Posted April 19, 2003 Fuck Metallica unless the new album is good and they kick Lars the fuck out. Going in a new direction usually is almost necessary for certain bands. However, there's a difference between, say, changing the style of a lot of your music (the more prog, but still kick ass, Iron Maiden stuff) and just being pathetic cock-sucking wannabe mainstreamers (Def Leppard's X. Okay, they always sucked before, but never to the degree X does...). Still, I can't help but love AC/DC for still doing the same basic style of music. Keepin' the faith even though the Young brothers look like dwarves and the whole band could pass for grandfathers of a lot of their younger fans. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CoreyLazarus416 Report post Posted April 19, 2003 I fail to see how borrowing from 3 different styles constitutes unoriginality. Sabbath borrowed from blues, rock n' roll, and classical. So, I guess they ripped off tons of blues musicians... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Dmann2000 Report post Posted April 20, 2003 Still, I can't help but love AC/DC for still doing the same basic style of music. Keepin' the faith even though the Young brothers look like dwarves and the whole band could pass for grandfathers of a lot of their younger fans. Amen brother, "Have a Drink On Me" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Agent of Oblivion Report post Posted April 20, 2003 I fail to see how borrowing from 3 different styles constitutes unoriginality. Sabbath borrowed from blues, rock n' roll, and classical. So, I guess they ripped off tons of blues musicians... First of all, everyone in the rock music business owes Muddy Waters and Willie Dixon a blowjob. The entire genre is based off of blues, so that cancels out. Besides, there aren't any moments with Sabbath where you can really point and say "Hey, that sounds a lot like Cream," or "That really reminds me of the Beatles," when you can pop in a metallica album and notice almost immediately. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Johnson1620 Report post Posted April 21, 2003 I'm not saying there are no original bands at all, Just that Metallica admits to totally aping the sound of those three influences. I mean, it's not like that's just "Grr, I don't like metallica so HAH" material, They genuinely borrow generously from their influences, and it's easy to tell. Why not take an influence and do something different with it? For example. Sabbath was influenced by the Beatles, yet sound nothing like them. Same with Tool and King Crimson, among others. Standing out as great means standing out from your influences, as well as the bands they themselves influence. Metallica hardly does that. Dude, everyone has influences. That doesn't mean they rip them off. And Metallica sounds nothing like Sabbath, THe Misfits, or Motorhead. Well, maybe a little like Motorhead on Kill'Em All, but besides that I can't see Metallica "ripping" anyone off. They have just sucked for about the past 15 years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CoreyLazarus416 Report post Posted April 21, 2003 I've been listening to Metallica for 7 years. I've memorized each song so that I need only hear 3 or 4 seconds of it to know which song it is (pre-Load). I can barely actually HEAR the Sabbath influence. The Misfits influence and the Motörhead influence somewhat cancel each other. Also, The Misfits influence didn't have much time to take affect, as Cliff was the one that introduced James, Kirk, and Lars to the band, mostly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mindless_Aggression Report post Posted April 21, 2003 I for whatever reason have always heard a strong influece from Motorhead and the like when it comes to Metallica. King Diamond as well. It doesn't stand up and slap you in the face screaming "WE RIPPED THEM OFF" but its there and quite obvious at times. But you could say that about anybody frankly. Everyone at least slightly borrows from their influences. I once again shall offer this resolution: Everyone just agree that Linkin Park sucks and call it a day. Oh wait, I just saw on MTV2's The Wrap that young Avril will be doing Fuel for the Metallica Icon thing. Just thought i'd throw that out there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest redbaron51 Report post Posted April 21, 2003 First of all: Metallica didn't have a Black Sabbath influence on them, yet the sound is almost there. I agree on Motorhead, Misfits, but also, Metallica's influence came more from UFO as well. You can tell, Kirk is trying to be like Michael Schenkar. Second: I agree with Corey, that Reign In Blood is a good album, half of it is crap, which degrades the total value of the album. It's a signifigant album for Slayer, but the album lacked something that Metallica had. For a better Slayer album, and probably there best, Seasons of the Abyss is far superior. Third: Iron Maiden rulez. Fourth: James is an adequate singer. Nothing spectacular, and there are tons of singers better than him (Bruce and Dave come to mind, but not Tom...not Tom at all). Megadeth in a way was trying to do the same thing Metallica did, but made solid albums that stood away from Metallica's album, and actually some where better. (IE Countdown and Rust In Peace are better than Metallica, and And Justice For All) Both James and Dave proved that you can play complexed riffs at a fast tempo, sing, yet sounds so amazing. Hardly any bands can do that now adays, unless they need to over-dubb the recording. (3 notes at a faster tempo is not technical skill) As far as Iron Maiden goes. Most of their riffs are power-chord based, but the solo's are easy, or complicated (Number of the Beast solo+whammy bar+finger tapping at the same time=Dave Murray). Oh and for great harmonizing, Iron Maiden ownz all. Fifth: Cliff Burton has some good solo's mind you, but there are better bassists: John Myung Geddy Lee Victor Wootan Stu Hamm Justin Chancellor (Tool) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Agent of Oblivion Report post Posted April 21, 2003 Fifth: Cliff Burton has some good solo's mind you, but there are better bassists: John Myung Geddy Lee Victor Wootan Stu Hamm Justin Chancellor (Tool) A-FUCKING-HEM.. ::points at sig:: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DARRYLXWF Report post Posted April 22, 2003 Some French website posted a review of all the songs off the new album. Generally, they conclude that the album is NOT a commercial album. There are no 'short' songs on this album, the shortest being 5:13 with 6 of the 11 reaching over 7 mins. So, I think its safe to say it's definetely faster than the load albums, but from reading the song reviews, more melodic than 'And Justice For All...' Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest mesepher Report post Posted April 22, 2003 Some French website posted a review of all the songs off the new album. Generally, they conclude that the album is NOT a commercial album. There are no 'short' songs on this album, the shortest being 5:13 with 6 of the 11 reaching over 7 mins. So, I think its safe to say it's definetely faster than the load albums, but from reading the song reviews, more melodic than 'And Justice For All...' "there is no hell, there is only France" - FZ now... would YOU trust something from France? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest redbaron51 Report post Posted April 22, 2003 unless its Wine or Renault cars, and some french girls, nothing else Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CoreyLazarus416 Report post Posted April 22, 2003 Being probably the biggest Metallica supporter here at TSM, I'm being severely skeptical. Every preview of the album says it will be heavy shit...but so did every preview of ReLoad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
