Guitar World's Top Ten Metal Albums

[Guest Dace59]

SOAD IS NU METAL!?!?!

 

I've always considered them either hard rock or alternative metal. I always thought Nu Metal was the rapcore, hip hop influenced metal like Limp Bizkit or Linkin Park.

Yes SOAD is Nu Metal. There is no such thing as Alt. Mteal.

 

And Nu Metal is a Rock genre anyway. As it is Alt. Rock with INFLUENCES only from Metal and other genres.

 

Niether Linkin Park or Limp Bizikt are anything close to Metal. As for Rapcore or RapMetal, it's generally just Nu Metal with a Rap X Factor. But there are some bands than manage to stand out and be half decent at it, like RATM.

 

As for the Metal you like, all Metal, all pretty hardcore stuff, and all good (apart from SFU).

 

Some Metal doesnt want mass media exposure, or in the case of Black Metal HATES exposure and considers the fact the less people know of them the better (but that's a werid Black Metal culter thing).

 

An personally, if I saw a Mini Mosher in a Opeth or Cryptopsy hoodie, I'd be pissed.

Metal can go one way or the other. Underground and true. Or go to the big labels, give up control, get themselves all over TV, and make money. And be hated.

The only bands that relitivly big, and relitivly true are the ones that have been around for a long time, and have become know about by sheer weight of fans across time.

 

Issue on Taste: Wide taste is USLESS. Because you won't know much about what you like, it's history, roots, or what lies under the surface.

Deep Taste means you don't like so much, but you know all about what you like, it's history, how it came to be, the influences, the culter of it etc.

 

But that is all generally of cause and can not be take in every situatuion.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

... But there are some bands than manage to stand out and be half decent at it, like RATM...

 

Issue on Taste: Wide taste is USLESS. Because you won't know much about what you like, it's history, roots, or what lies under the surface.

Deep Taste means you don't like so much, but you know all about what you like, it's history, how it came to be, the influences, the culter of it etc.

...and Snot.

 

I don't get you view on taste at all, since it's completely possible to enjoy a wide array of genres, and really get into them. If not, that's just laziness and being picky for the sake of being picky. There's all kinds of good shit in all kinds of genres, might as well listen to it, you know?

[Guest Dace59]

Ok, it should be rephrased to wide taste is usless without depth to it.

 

I know there's good stuff in pretty much all genres.

[Guest NoCalMike]

Reign in Blood by Slayer should be the #1 album in ANY Metal top 10, considering you ask just about any member of a metal band and they will basically say that "Raining Blood" is THE METAL THEME.

[B. Brian Brunzell 0]

I don't know man. When I think Slayer and Metal, I think "Angel of Death."

[Guest NoCalMike]

As far as the "Nu-Metal" debate goes. I think it is more accurate to just call it, "agressive rock" moreso then labeling it having ANYTHING to do with Metal. Remember, "I listened to Slayer when I was 16 years old" is not enough to say you are a metal band.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

While "Raining Blood" might be A metal anthem (trust me, there are people in a lot more bands that would choose something by Sabbath or Motörhead than they would Slayer), the album simply is not that great. If every song was as equally great as the opening and closing tracks, I wouldn't disagree. However, they're not. Every song between "Angel Of Death" and "Raining Blood" is filler. You could get rid of all but three songs on the album ("Angel Of Death," "Post Mortem," and "Raining Blood"), and you probably wouldn't notice the difference. That's BAD.

 

Slayer didn't truthfully master the art of creating great albums until Seasons Of The Abyss, with South Of Heaven setting the stage for it.

[Guest DARRYLXWF]

I prefer Puppets, simply because the tracks "Trapped Under Ice" and "Escape" are not on it. I don't mind those songs, but they're filler tracks with decent riffs. As I've said earlier, the only filler track on Puppets was "The Thing That Should Not Be." But its purpose was to cool off the listener after "Battery" and "Master Of Puppets" so they could get ready for "Welcome Home (Sanitarium)," "Disposable Heroes," "Leper Messiah," "Orion," and "Damage, Inc."

I dunno. Most metallica fans love 'The Thing that Should Not Be,' too much so to actually call it a filler track. I don't think MOP has any fillers, though if Damage Inc wasn't put in the last track (say Orion was last, The thing that Should not be replaced Orion, and Damage Inc came into the 3rd track) then I would DEFINETELY call Damage Inc filler. It's the only song on the album which I think is weaker than the rest. Unfortunetly, how can one call the last track filler? So I'm stuck.

[Guest NoCalMike]

While "Raining Blood" might be A metal anthem (trust me, there are people in a lot more bands that would choose something by Sabbath or Motörhead than they would Slayer), the album simply is not that great. If every song was as equally great as the opening and closing tracks, I wouldn't disagree. However, they're not. Every song between "Angel Of Death" and "Raining Blood" is filler. You could get rid of all but three songs on the album ("Angel Of Death," "Post Mortem," and "Raining Blood"), and you probably wouldn't notice the difference. That's BAD.

 

Slayer didn't truthfully master the art of creating great albums until Seasons Of The Abyss, with South Of Heaven setting the stage for it.

Ummm.....Jesus Saves.....Altar of Sacrifice....There is no filler on that album. Seasons in the Abyss is a damn solid album, but I still rank it 2nd behind "Reign in Blood"

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Every song between "Angel Of Death" and "Post Mortem" sounds exactly the same. You could get rid of those songs and not know the difference. Reign In Blood's entire popularity arose from the opening and closing tracks. Slayer rarely, if ever, plays tracks from that album aside from "Angel Of Death" and "Raining Blood." The songs were just added to keep the pace of "Angel Of Death" until the album could end with "Raining Blood." It's not really a hard or foreign concept to grasp.

 

DARRYL, "The Thing That Should Not Be" is most definitely filler. Like I said, it's purpose on the album is to make the listener "mellow out" after "Battery" and "Master Of Puppets" so they can get ready for "Welcome Home (Sanitarium)." Putting "Damage, Inc." in the song's place wouldn't make much sense, as that song has "closer" written all over it.

[Guest Vitamin X]

As far as the "Nu-Metal" debate goes. I think it is more accurate to just call it, "agressive rock" moreso then labeling it having ANYTHING to do with Metal. Remember, "I listened to Slayer when I was 16 years old" is not enough to say you are a metal band.

But.. but... I really did listen to Slayer when I was 16 years old.. And that was before I even really considered myself a metal fan (and I still loved Sabbath as well)

 

I don't know, it's just that everytime I hear or see that word "Nu-Metal" it ALWAYS has a negative connotation behind it, because of the shitty bands that have been associated with that term, thus why I can't really label SOAD in that category because they are far FAR better than your average Disturbed/Godsmack/WWE PPV Theme bullshit. But I can't really consider them metal either.

 

Oh, and I also agree 100% with the guy who said when he thinks Slayer and metal, he thinks "Angel of Death".

[Guest DARRYLXWF]

DARRYL, "The Thing That Should Not Be" is most definitely filler. Like I said, it's purpose on the album is to make the listener "mellow out" after "Battery" and "Master Of Puppets" so they can get ready for "Welcome Home (Sanitarium)." Putting "Damage, Inc." in the song's place wouldn't make much sense, as that song has "closer" written all over it.

Would they play a filler track on S&M? But my main disagreement is this. I find this whole 'gettings ready for another song' quite bullshit. A song is a song. Music is music, a great piece of music will be recognized regardless of what comes before or after it. Everyone's tastes are different, so there is no way you can 'prepare' someone for a song by producing a different song which key purpose is to tackle someones emotions on the album. I'm proof of that, TTTSNB in no way "got me ready" for 'Welcome Home'. I could listen to Battery or MOP and still have the same enjoyment level of Welcome Home than if I listened to the track beforehand.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

It's called creating a whole album as opposed to a number of individual songs.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Thus the difference between LPs and EPs for the most part..

[Guest The Metal Maniac]

While I do understand what Corey means by creating a whole album, I don't think that quite means that Metallica stuck the track on there for that specific reason. Until someone in the band actually says "Yeah, we wanted to mellow people out for the later tracks" then it's really just speculation, as the track could easily have been placed there for no other reason then that they had to put it somewhere.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Of course, it's all just my opinion after having listened to the album for a very long time. I'll even go over what I feel are the reasons for each song's placing on the album.

 

"Battery" - The song just FEELS like an opener. It has the classical/Spanish acoustic opening, thrust right into pure old-school Bay Area thrash. The song is all about energy, and its placement as the album's opener is to make the listener's heart start beating. The overall form of the song also parallels "Fight Fire With Fire," the opener of the prior album.

"Master Of Puppets" - After the last song's end, this song picks right up. Its purpose is to keep the listener's heart beating, and make the listener's heartbeat increase in speed. In the middle, there is a slowdown to make the listener feel at ease. The pace builds back up, and the listener knows that the song is getting ready to become heavier. The song ends on a somewhat down note, the abrupt end allowing the listener to calm down. The form of the song slightly parallels the form of the second song on the prior album, which was also its album's title.

"The Thing That Should Not Be" - This album was to, for the most part, allow the listener to cool down after two fast-paced and hard-hitting songs. While the song does have its own heavy parts, they are still relatively mellow compared to the previous two songs.

"Welcome Home (Sanitarium)" - The song starts off very, VERY slow, and seems almost as if the music is too soft and "happy" for the lyrics, which are about insanity. The song has a hard-hitting chorus, and after the second verse, the pace is kicked back up to that of the two opening songs, and carried one through to the end of the track. The overall form of this song also parallels the fourth track on the prior album.

"Disposable Heroes" - After the fast-paced, hard-hitting ending of the prior song, the same pace is kept up, and even quickened at points. Faster tempo's are added, as well as more changes in temp.

"Leper Messiah" - A somewhat slower-paced song than "Disposable Heroes," but still serving a purpose nonetheless. The song is hard-hitting, but also mellows out quite a bit.

"Orion" - The obligatory Metallica instrumental. The song has a slow build, continuing off the end of the prior song, and a heavy main-riff. The middle is pure breakdown. The heaviness and speed is picked back up, and carries directly into the album's closer.

"Damage, Inc." - The song has a very slow opening minute, building off of momentum from "Orion" that was dropped during the song's fading-out ending. The main riff hits in, and the speed is not dropped until the very last second.

[Guest benoitrulz4life]

Reign in Blood is the definition of thrash. Although some may not agree with that statement, Reign in Blood was the reason the death metal/thrash movement came about. Sure Venom came before them, but Slayer MADE death metal/black metal. They themselves cannot be classified as such, since they sometimes found themselves delving into subjects other than bodily dismemberment or the pits of hell. Reign in Blood is like a roller coaster from the end of Angel of Death all the way to the rain falling in Raining Blood. It's not meant to be varied or textured, it's only purpose is to pound the listener into sweet, willing oblivion.

 

If Slayer's albums were ranked, this would most definitely be at the top:

 

1. Reign in Blood

2. Seasons in the Abyss

3. South of Heaven

4. God Hates Us All

5. Hell Awaits

6. Divine Intervention

7. Diabolus in Musica

8. Undisputed Attitude (does this count?)

9. Show No Mercy

[Guest redbaron51]

God Hates Us All and Diabolus in Musica ahead of Divine Intervention and Show No Mercy???

 

 

whoa...

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

...Reign in Blood was the reason the death metal/thrash movement came about. Sure Venom came before them, but Slayer MADE death metal/black metal.

...I don't even need to say anything about the absurdity of that statement.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Regarding Slayer:

 

1. Divine Intervention

2. Seasons in the Abyss

3. South of Heaven

4. Reign in Blood

5. Show No Mercy

6. God Hates Us All

7. Hell Awaits

8. Diabolus in Musica

 

Undisputed Attitude doesn't count. Neither do Decade of Aggression or Live Undead, even though they both rule.

[Guest benoitrulz4life]

Okay Lazarus, maybe that could have used a little rewording but most current death/black metal bands would never have existed if it weren't for Slayer. Even though Venom came before them, Slayer perfected the sound that eventually evolved into today's death metal/black metal.

 

And who died and made you King of All Things Metal? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't even think you're legally old enough to buy porn, so you're statement of "I've listened to it my whole life" doesn't hold much weight when compared to writers on a website who may be twice as old as you, and were actually, you know, around when all these movements started, so I'll take their word over yours anyday.

 

No hard feelings, because I don't even know you personally.

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

So...modern black metal, with its basis on Satanic messagery and Norse mythologies lyrically as well as blastbeat drumming and fast and slow guitar parts with its screeched vocals and classical symphonic harmonies and its overall "other worldly" feeling, is more akin to Slayer, whose music was all about speed and aggression and showing why the world was filled with violence and hatred as a way to deal with it, than to Venom, who is regarded as the start of the black metal scene, in every which way? Doesn't make much sense to me.

 

And it doesn't matter if these people are older than me. Paul Gargano (sp.?) is in his mid-30's, is the editor of Metal Edge magazine, and considers NIRVANA to be a metal band. I'm willing to bet he went to a Judas Priest show when Halford was still with the band, too. As well as a Metallica show when MUSTAINE was still with them, or an Exodus show when Kirk Hammett was the lead guitarist. Doesn't mean jack shit if he's wrong. And that article is, as I've dissected, wrong on many parts.

 

For somebody to call Led Zeppelin the starters of metal would be to ignore journalistic history. The VERY FIRST band to ever be called "heavy metal" by ANYBODY was Black Sabbath. Zeppelin was nothing more than a blues rock band that used SOME distortion here and there and had a singer with tight pants that wore Hawaiian shirts. Fuck, Iggy Pop is more metal than Zeppelin.

[Guest benoitrulz4life]

At least calling Nirvana a metal band is something we all can agree is stupid.

[Guest saturnmark4life]

Zeppelin were more of the missing link between blues and metal than one or the other, I think. But I don't wanna try and sound knowledgable about any of this when I'm not.