Board logo

St. Anger Is Here
metallikid - 5-28-2003 at 02:06 AM

Video debuts on MTV at 11:30 pm. I've seen in and it kicks all types of ass. Metallica does it again. I'm counting down the days until June 10th. Please get here faster.

bigfatgoalie - 5-28-2003 at 03:45 AM

OK, so all the fuss for that???

Like seriously, cool video, but the song itself sounds...generic...

metallikid - 5-28-2003 at 03:49 AM

I'll respect any opinoin here and please feel free to express yours in the future. Just be warned you will see me "mark" out for this song, album, or anything else. I'm as giddy as a 12 year old girl when Jeff Hardy takes off his shirt. I thought the song rocked and I've heard pieces of many of them in a video on the fan club website and they all sound hard, and heavy. I'm not sure what generic is but if that was generic then give me more of it.

Alana - 5-28-2003 at 07:24 AM

I saw the video when MTV2 debuted it at noon... cool video, and the song is interesting. Being the dork that I am, I taped it and watched it a few more times.

My reaction to it was identical to when I first heard System of a Down's "Chop Suey!" I listened, and thought, "What the fuck is this?" The more I heard it, though, the more I liked it. The same goes for St. Anger.

Lars seems to have kicked his drumming up a notch (it almost reminded me of the drum track on "Blackened" ), but I HATE the trash-can sound that they recorded with. It sounds cheap, which is weird for a band that's had stellar production values since the Black Album. It surprises me that they'd intentionally record the drum tracks that way.

Alana - 5-28-2003 at 07:28 AM

I forgot to ask: are you seeing them live on this tour, metallikid? (this is probably a dumb question)

I'm flying out to San Francisco in August for a vacation with a few friends, and the second day of the trip, I'll be seeing them play in Candlestick Park. Woohoo!

Ando - 5-28-2003 at 07:42 AM

I was thinking the same thing, the System comparison that is. I thought "Oh no, everyone says they've gone soft, so they've tried to cram as much violent noise into the intro of the song to prove them all wrong". But the more I hear it the more I like it, just like most System songs. Although I'm not too sure if the "Push it" lyric fits in to the song, any Metallica song for that matter, sounded like James was bust out some thuganometry! Overall thumbs up though, went and pre ordered my album today, and it'll be in my hot little hands two days before any of you North Americans get it! Wooo! But then again, you guys have the chance to see them live

Alana - 5-28-2003 at 08:00 AM

Sorry about that, Ando. I guess they won't be stopping anywhere near you on the world tour? And if you can't see 'em live, I'd recommend that you pick up the Cunning Stunts DVD (the extras with the guys backstage are hilarious... the "barbecued kitty fritters" bit had me rolling) or Live Shit, if you don't already own them.

You just gave me a mental image of James trying to rap. Sure, it may be sacreligious, but it's also pretty damn funny.

Ando - 5-28-2003 at 08:50 AM

I think they're rumoured here for late January for the Big Day Out (big ass music festival).

I'm disappointed with my countrymen The Datsuns though. Turned the boys down when they were invited on the Sanitarium tour, or it may have just been the European part. Who knows. Dumbasses.

Ando - 5-28-2003 at 10:01 AM

One thing I forgot to add before. There's gonna be some fucken sore necks come Sunday morning if they play this at the clubs on Saturday night. Oh well, I guess I'm lucky Monday is a public holiday.

metallikid - 5-28-2003 at 01:24 PM

July 13 in the Florida Citrus Bowl Baby!!! I'm already there. Anyway, I too am a dork Alana. It is taped and I have already watched it numerous times PLUS I downloaded it from Kazaa and watch it there when I am on the computer. Damn the album is going to rule. I never really got the System vibe but that might be because I can't compare Metallica to anybody because that wouldn't be fair to everyone else so I've trained myself against that. I kinda like the trash can quality sound though. I have a few bootlegs that I got a hold of and my favorites are always the ones that are so old or rare that they sound like shit. I love it.

Alana - 5-28-2003 at 08:25 PM

You and Ando might get a kick out of this. It's Kerrang's review of St. Anger.


Metal's High Priests Rediscover their fury.

You could hardly have failed to enjoy the irony. The internet rumour mill went into overdrive as word got out that Metallica had made - steel yourself, folks! - a metal album. As welcome as this genuinely
shocking news was, a sizeable minority of the band's huge fan base must have felt a pang of bitterness.

After 15 years of overproduced, verblown and increasingly middle-aged albums that either sneered contemptuously at a pioneering past or drifted gently sideways, immune to any modern influence, a lot of people will be approaching 'St Anger' with a real sense of trepidation. If this is a real metal album, it had better be a fucking good one.

Let's not piss about, Metallica could release any old bollocks and watch it fly off the shelves. Having acquired an entirely new audience in the years after the emergence of that polished and
unthreatening eponymous album, there is no longer any need to placate the underground metal purists than once revered this band's name. As a result, 'St Anger' could be interpreted as a genuinely daring career move; because it is the one thing that Metallica's current fan-base will not be prepared for. This is one seriously brutal and intense album that rejects utterly the staid ramblings of
the 90's and replaces them with a vibrant combination of the band's snotty, hell-for-leather origins and something altogether more adventurous and invigorating.

As 'St Anger' begins, with the aptly-named 'Frantic', those convinced that Metallica have forgotten how to be a metal band will be pinching themselves. Blasting off with a thunderous, percussive intro, the song is a raging, six-minute raised middle-digit that expands and
contracts around a convoluted whirlwind of angular, dissonant riffs and ferocious rhythmic breakdowns. It is, quite simply,
magnificent. And, gloriously, this is no false dawn. Ambitious, intricate and, in sonic terms at least, easily the heaviest material of the band's career. 'St Anger' is evidence of an entirely new musical manifesto. The album's sound is one ripped wholesale for the sweaty, tinnitus-inducing confines of the rehearsal room.

Guitars are distorted to the point of collapse, drums reverberate with every stick-strike and the bass rumbles and grinds with a tone so dirty you could use it as fertiliser. Riding across it all is that unmistakable Hetfield baritone; from delicate harmonies to demented bellowing, here the frontman sounds more fired up than he has in years. In fact, the whole band are patently having the time of their lives. Jason Newsted, on the other hand, may not be quite so amused.

Inevitably, 'St Anger' is not entirely flawless. At 75 minutes, this is an incredibly long album and a few tracks would have benefited from a spot of judicious editing.

There are also several points where Lars Ulrich sounds close to tumbling off his stool as he strains to keep up with the furious pace of those challenging songs. The Dane escapes with his dignity intact, but it will be interesting to see how he acquits himself onstage this time around.

Finally, and bizarrely, there is not a single guitar solo to be found anywhere on 'St Anger'. Those raised on nu-metal will not flinch, but for everyone else this will seem like a criminal misuse of Kirk Hammett's phenomenal skills as a lead guitarist. Either way none of these songs suffer unduly as a result. This is not a Metallica we have ever encountered before. As heady and uncompromising as it is, 'St Anger' has little in common with the band's first four albums. Even some lyrical references to those early records ('Fuck it all and no regrets, I hit the lights on these dark sets' roars Hetfield on the title-track) seem more like wry asides than genuine attempts to revive a bygone era. Even the fact that, for the first time in 15 years, Metallica actually thrash on several of these songs cannot disguise that this is a band renewed, not merely revived; a band rediscovering what made them special in the first place and, rather than making some obsequious, conciliatory gesture towards
their original fan-base, rebuilding their sound from scratch. No ballads, no orchestras and no fucking country music. Somewhere up in the ether, Cliff Burton is taking a hit from the celestial bong and
grinning from ear to ear. Welcome home, boys.

Metallica - St Anger 4/5

Article written by Dom Lawson
Kerrang 31 May 2003


salmonjunkie - 5-28-2003 at 10:22 PM

Sounds promising, Alana. Lars said on MTV Icon something like Metallica being closer now to what Jason wanted it to be, and it may have require Jason leaving to do so. Do you remember that?

Me and my best friend were actually throwing around the idea of going to the SF Sanitarium show. The LA one only has crappy seats left and no General Admission tickets left. And it's more expensive. It gives me an excuse for a weekend roadtrip, at the very least.

If I see you there, you'd better mosh with me, young lady!

mallrat - 5-28-2003 at 10:37 PM

I thought the song was pretty good, it needed a nice long guitar solo though.

metallikid - 5-28-2003 at 10:55 PM

I haven't heard the album yet but from the sound of the video I wouldn't be surprised if they clipped the intro to make the video under six minutes. It may be nothing but it sounded weird when it changed from the intro to the first verse. Maybe there is more to the intro on the album.

Krydor - 5-29-2003 at 12:10 AM

Well, we'll see. Metallica is a corporate entity, much like the Rolling Stones. Don't think they did this to satisfy hardcore fans. They went back to basics because market research showed them that was what the kids were digging.

In the end, this will be a generic record (when I hear the whole thing, I'll give it a real assesment) with very little to deliniate it from whatever Mettalica inspired nu metal band is out there.

They aren't innovators any more, they are followers. After D/L St. Anger (the Video), all I can say is "how is this any different than Nickelback?" Sellouts.

I understand that many have an attachment to the band. After the crap they pulled on Napster, I have no idea how anyone could continue to support them. The rest of the album better be fantastic, because this first cut is hardly reflective of the edge I know they posess.

metallikid - 5-29-2003 at 05:51 PM

How can we be fans after Napster?? Fuck Napster. I don't give two flying shits about them. People stopped buying CDs when they began downlaoding. That is the thr truth. Metallica was the only band that had the balls to come out and say it. Sure there are some bands that don't mind Napster but they are easily a minority.

I still don't think St. Anger sounded generic. And if it is similar to another band I don't really care because Metallica does it better then Nickelback or anybody else out there. I liked the track because I had never heard Metallica so anything like that before. From the samples of the other songs I heard they were all hard and heavy and I'm pretty sure if you didn't like St. Anger then the rest of the album might not be for you. We will have to wait and see. 12 more days!! I'll be there!

Krydor - 5-29-2003 at 07:15 PM

Originally posted by metallikid
How can we be fans after Napster?? Fuck Napster. I don't give two flying shits about them. People stopped buying CDs when they began downlaoding. That is the thr truth. Metallica was the only band that had the balls to come out and say it. Sure there are some bands that don't mind Napster but they are easily a minority.

I still don't think St. Anger sounded generic. And if it is similar to another band I don't really care because Metallica does it better then Nickelback or anybody else out there. I liked the track because I had never heard Metallica so anything like that before. From the samples of the other songs I heard they were all hard and heavy and I'm pretty sure if you didn't like St. Anger then the rest of the album might not be for you. We will have to wait and see. 12 more days!! I'll be there!

Well, this could get nasty. Metallica told their hardcore fans to bootleg tapes "back in the day" to increase their exposure. It's why they jumped from east coast to west coast in a seemingly short time.

It's corporate rock, dude. All Lars needed was a pair of laceless Adidas hightops and the image would be complete. I was waiting for a rap bridge in that song.

There weren't many bands against Napster, just the corporations. I suggest you look at the overall CD trends since Napster peaked and since it died. Record sales during Napster and crappy sales since they were forced out.

metallikid - 5-29-2003 at 09:06 PM

Back when you are trying to get heard you need bootlegs and the bands who were in favor of Napster were the ones trying to "make it". I'm not buying that record sales during Napster line either because even when Napster was at its height most people didn't have fast enough lines to download music. The reason sales are down now is probably because of KaZaA and other Napster knockoffs so sales haven't been effected because of Napsters demise.

Slade - 5-29-2003 at 09:28 PM

Indeed, bootlegs were needed to get exposure. It was the quintessential 'word of mouth' format for gaining exposure in the music industry. Napster changed that. The reason Metallica opposed Napster is because once it came along they'd made it and became big rich corporate cocksuckers. If bootlegging was still the method of choices for getting free music and Metallica did not need bootlegs of their stuff in circulation to be heard or to get people out to the shows, they would oppose it too.

I would agree with Krydor that this move was probably based on market research. Hell I've heard enough opinions around here about the band going soft or needing to tap into their past or what have you to understand why they recorded a much harder record.

Finally, Metallikid, once a band can sell out stadium and arena tours, they don't need album sales to make money. Merchandise and ticket sales will suffice. I can't see why they would oppose Napster or any other downloading system if all they're concerned about it getting their money. They wouldn't lose much from a decrease in record sales. The record company and distributor are the ones that profit off of record sales. Many bands have said that they make their money from touring. The only thing that forcing a Napster or a KaZaA to kill their service does is hurt indepents, underground, new and struggling artists and bands that can use the exposure to bring more people out to their shows when they tour. It could make all the difference in the world, enabling a band to actually make a little bit of money from a tour.

metallikid - 5-29-2003 at 10:41 PM

I am almost positive now that the intro is clipped for the video. I just read a review on that said St. Anger clocks in at 7:24. The video is only 5:54 so I think the intro will be longer. Can;t wait to hear the whole thing.

salmonjunkie - 5-29-2003 at 10:52 PM

Slade, you are correct about the money thing. Bootlegging a double-edged sword in underground hip-hop. Sure, you get exposure, but you get no money, especially when you're an MC or a group that plays mostly small clubs and don't have t-shirts to sell.

DJ Shadow is definitely one guy who has legit reasons to gripe about Napster and Kaaza. How do 50,000 people have an album he only pressed 5000 copies of that he still hasn't sold out of yet? And who benefits? Not Shadow.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a big time downloader. I compensate by going to live shows and buying new releases from artists I download from. I hated Lars for coming out and saying what he said (I no longer do). I'm sure a lot of his gripe was given to him by his record company.

Oh yeah, the new song. It's good. Not as well produced as Until It Sleeps. Not powerful and awesome like One. Not as crunching as Sandman. I hated the bucket-drum sound of And Justice For All, too, which sucks because it has some of my favorite songs on it. Kerry King from Slayer said the same thing about it. Although, what he said about Load and Reload was classic: "Sounds like they loaded a bunch shit into a cannon and fired it. Then reloaded that shit and shot it out again." I don't mind those two albums, but to read Kerry say that, cracked me up.

Alana - 5-29-2003 at 10:58 PM

Hey guys? If you want to start a Napster debate, I'm asking you to make another thread for it, so we can just discuss the album here without any flame wars.

mallrat: there are no guitar solos on the entire album.

Krydor: I don't understand your comparison of Metallica to Nickelback. Nickelback is a band whose songs can be heard on Top 40 radio stations; Metallica is not. Judging by the first single, St. Anger appears to have ZERO appeal to "crossover" audiences. Do you think that people who listen to primarily pop, rap, or country would be interested in this album? I doubt it. This album doesn't seem like something that a "corporate" band interested in profits would make.

And one thing that I will never understand about the "Metallica went soft" and "Metallica made a country song" (Mama Said) arguments: why is it that when they attempt a different type of music, it's selling out, but when someone like... say, Neil Young (for example) does it, it's applauded? I don't get it.

metallikid - 5-29-2003 at 11:08 PM

I agree with Alana on this one, they didn't sell out. And how can you get mad for making Mama Said. The guy wrote a song for his dead mother and the other 3 members of the band made James put it on the album because it is a powerful song. A man is pouring out his heart to a his mother, it was something he couldn't do when she was alive. I'm not a country music fan but I like that song and yes it sounds twangy and it is slower but I wouldn't say they sold out because you don't like one song.

St. Anger won't sound like Top 40 radio and it won't sound like System, Korn, or any other band. Parts of songs may be similar but parts of every song are similar to some other song. I love the evolution of Metallica's music and while my favorite albums tend to be the older ones I don't need them to recreate those albums. I want them to come up with new sounds and great music and they have not let me down yet nor do I think they ever will. Keep rocking on James, Lars, Kirk, and Rob.

Alana - 5-29-2003 at 11:13 PM

You know, I always thought it was kind of funny that my favorite Metallica album is, in fact, Load (I have all of Metallica's albums, and I think I got that one fourth, after TBA, Justice, and Master).

salmonjunkie - 5-29-2003 at 11:19 PM

That is kinda funny. I don't know anyone who says "Load" is their favorite. It's still a good album nonetheless.

My favorite would have to be Master. But my favorite song is between One and Fade To Black.

metallikid - 5-29-2003 at 11:21 PM

I honestly can never pick mine changes frequently. I've been listening to And Justice For All a lot lately but if I had to pick only one right now I'd say Master of Puppetz. When Reload came out it was my favorite for a long time though. Damn even as I write I can make cases for all the albums. I don't think I can pick.

Alana - 5-29-2003 at 11:32 PM

One and Fade to Black -- good picks, junkie, and two of my favorites. But I'd have to go with Bleeding Me or Outlaw Torn, and I would shit a brick if they actually played those songs on their tour (yeah, I know they did on S&M, but they almost never play those live).

metallikid - 5-29-2003 at 11:38 PM

I would like them to play Fixxxer live. That is one of my favorites. I also want to see Dyers Eve but even the boys admit they probably can't do it live because it is too fast and would sound shitty live.

Alana - 5-29-2003 at 11:48 PM

As far as I know, they've never played Fixxxer live (just a short jam of the opening riffs). It's a damn shame, too. Great song.

And it's not the whole band that can't pull off Dyers Eve; Lars freely admits that he can't play it anymore. I'm starting to think that he might be able to, though, after hearing the insane double bass on St. Anger.

metallikid - 5-29-2003 at 11:51 PM

I'm pretty sure James and Kirk both agreed it was too fast for them to do also but Lars would die if he had to do all those songs live. Anyway, I hope we get to hear St. Anger live and it won't become Dyer's Eve to them. I expect to hear it July 13th.

the_old_fart - 5-30-2003 at 02:07 AM

St. Anger kicks Ass.

I am an OLD hard core fan. I began listening to them when Ride the Lightning came out. My first Metallica concert was when they opened for Ozzie.

I HATED Load and Reload and for the first time refused to see them in concert because of those albums (cds).

I looked on the website and they did four free shows to practice for their tour. Each set was different every night....but they all had one thing in common......THEY DIDN'T PLAY A SINGLE LOAD/RELOAD SONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Metallica is back....I've downloaded St. Anger and played it several times. I love the raw underproduced sound, and the changes in tempo.

My band has returned from the abyss of comercialism and some warped attempt to become grunge/alternative instead of metal.

I am as excited as my ten year old about this album...........THE BOYS ARE BACK!!!

old folks rule

the_old_fart - 5-30-2003 at 02:09 AM

By the far as them playing all the "fast songs live"

Please remember...this is the band that played for three hours on the Black Album tour......also......they've been playing fast metal longer than most of you have been alive.......

old folks still rule

Krydor - 5-30-2003 at 03:39 AM


Oh, they are going for crossover success. Corporate rock is corporate rock. The slow parts in St. Anger sounds just like Nickelback. It could have been on the Spiderman soundtrack. When dreck like "Hero" goes number one, you know that "St. Anger" (not an innovative song from the band that pretty much brought speed metal to the fore) will do the same.

Look, they fell apart as a creative force the second they started charting in the late 80's, early 90's. They aren't trying to recapture their original fanbase, they are trying to recapture the album buying drones.

What's next? A tour with Bon Jovi?

The Master of Puppets is pulling the string.

the_old_fart - 5-30-2003 at 04:19 AM


In some ways I agree. It is not the most innovative song. Master and Justice are original and heavy. But, was Kill Em All and Ride the Lightning innovative and original? I've read reviews that say St. Anger is "commercial suicide". Read the replys on this board....they like Load and Reload.

I do agree that Metallica "sold out" with the Black Album....and flat abandoned their core fans with the "Loads" of crap.

However, I am an original fan....and I LIKE the new stuff, and will probably see them in concert again (though I'll watch the head bangin...that could be dangerous at my age).

So...if they are able to please their core fans....and remain mainstream....I don't care....I'm just glad that the fast and heavy stuff is back.

By the way....I think I'll have to listen to this Nickleback band.

Ando - 5-30-2003 at 07:16 AM

This is getting pretty fucken stupid. Who cares who's pulling whatever strings? Who cares what the band's motivation is for producing the songs? Who cares if it charts?

Does the song sound good to you? Do you like it? That's all that fucken matters guys.

Why the hostility towards 'evil' corporations? How have they disadvantaged you? Is it because they're huge financial entities? Are you lot jealous that they 'shock horror' make more money than you? Get over it for fuck's sake.

You like the song or you don't. There's no point arguing the songss merits based on whatever the fuck is going on behind the scenes.

Now, Alana, I know I've gone on record here as saying that Load is my favourite album too, but you know, everything got deleted.

Krydor - 5-31-2003 at 07:12 AM

What the hell happened? I had a brilliant post in response to Ando, and it went away.

Anyway, Metallica should innovate, not follow the herd.

It isn't about soulless corporations, but soulless artists.

How is today's Metallica any different than today's Aerosmith?

Not as long, or as brilliant, as my other post but it covers the bases nicely.

Anyway, listen to what you enjoy. I'll be waiting until I hear something from those guys that does not get raves because it is ahead of its time. To be fair, I've only heard the one track, but it does sound fairly generic and middle of the road.

bigfatgoalie - 5-31-2003 at 11:25 PM

I think Krydor is right...

Most bands suffer from getting old. It just happens. Espically when your "sound" is so linked to being young and angry. Metallic is limited by fans who won't let them grow, and thus come of as sounding generic...almost a parody of themselves.

It's not to say they still don't produce decent stuff...just that it's a lesser version of something they've all ready given us.

Slade - 6-1-2003 at 12:32 AM

Indeed, losing yesterday's posts sucks. I wrote a pretty long one ofr this thread that got lost. I don't feel like doing it over again, so if this sounds stupid, sorry but it's the "Cliff's Notes" version of what I wrote yesterday:

--> I will not start a Napster or KaZaA debate with anybody in here. The thread ought to remain about "St. Anger" and Metallica. My apologies to Alana.

--> My post was a critique of their ethics and their intent in making the record that they did. That should in no way reflect upon how one evaluates the music. Metallica fans should recognize this. I have recognized this as a Rolling Stones fan. Metallica has become "big rich corporate cocksuckers," just like the Rolling Stones about 20 years ago (or more). However, the merits of the music that they have made should not automatically be judged negatively for that reason. If Krydor thinks Metallica's new record sucks because they're a corporation, then I would say that he is not assessing the value of the record appropriately.

--> My post had nothing to do with whether or not "St. Anger" is a good record, or if Metallica makes good music. However, it deserves to be included in this discussion because the title of the thread is "St. Anger Is Here", and my previous post was geared more towards answering questions like 'why is St. Anger here,' 'how did St. Anger arrive,' and 'who is responsible for making St. Anger get here'.

--> Moreover, I will not express my thoughts on whether or not Metallica, it's new single or now record are (or will be) good in this thread. I thought that out of respect to big Metallica fans like Metallikid, Ando and Alana (some of which don't want to get into a heated discussion about Metallica being good or bad), I would not do that here. That's why I started a different thread related to Metallica, which you are all free to avoid like it was the plague.

I think that's it. I just thought I'd get some of those ideas back on the board. Hopefully this time they'll stick. Now onto other threads to rewrite things I wrote yesterday. Man, this is really annoying.

Ando - 6-1-2003 at 01:30 AM

Did anyone pick up on my channeling of Lars through my last post. I don't say fuck that often, just a little bit of fun

Krydor - 6-1-2003 at 03:18 AM

Slade (Keep your hands off my power supply)

My criticism of Metallica's current single is a combination of many things, most of which you covered nicely. I'm critical of the band because they are a corporate entity. I'm critical of the song, because it seems to be based on market research. Of course the vast majorty of their fans will like it, it was made that way. No offending the fans from back in the day and comfortable enough for new listeners.

It irks me to no end that once an innovative band becomes more or less mainstream, they stop taking risks. I'd imagine that this conversation could be carried on about any band that had a cult following and became a top 40 band.

Your Rolling Stones comparison is absolutely fantastic as it relates to Metallica. I always seem to go back and listen to what they were doing just around 1973. The new stuff doesn't have the fire.

mallrat - 6-1-2003 at 04:47 AM

After listening to the single a few more times I really like it, especially they way they change tempo all the time. I can't wait till June 10th.

And about me saying that it needed a guitar solo, apparently there are no guitar solos on the CD at all.

Alana - 6-1-2003 at 05:10 AM

Yesterday I posted, saying that fans arguing with nonfans about the merits of the music was useless -- neither side will budge, and the only place that this thread is going to end up is the Graveyard, the way things are going. I've had a million arguments like this before about the band, and nobody ever wins.

Then, I read Krydor's latest post. It blows my mind that you'd suggest that a band who has enough money to last them for the rest of their children's lifetimes would make songs based on market research.

"Rich corporate cocksuckers," as you put it, make songs that appeal to as many people as possible. Does St. Anger, a 7 1/2 minute-long song with brutal guitars and drums, as well as a good bit of screaming, sound like an attempt to reach out to a wide audience?

"Rich corporate cocksuckers" bring in outside songwriters (as Aerosmith did and still does). Metallica doesn't.

"Rich corporate cocksuckers" make songs that can be played on Top 40 radio. Metallica doesn't.

"Rich corporate cocksuckers" allow their record labels to license their music for use in all sorts of advertisements -- because they want to make money, right? Well, Metallica became the first band to sue their record labels (in the mid 90s, I believe) for complete ownership of their master recordings, so that sort of thing wouldn't happen to them.

Even with all your arguments and my arguments, I don't understand why you're so insistent on convincing us that Metallica are a bunch of sellouts. And to be honest, I don't know why I'm so insistent on convincing you that they're not.

I listen to the music because I like it. I'm obviously not going to get Krydor and Slade to listen to it, because they don't like it. Why can't we just leave it at that? This is getting ridiculous.

Krydor - 6-1-2003 at 07:30 AM


Never used the term "rich corporate cocksuckers".

However, bands that sell out often release their songs as a catalogue for the purpose of reselling them. Metallica has.

I called them a corporation, and not a band. It happens to pretty much every popular act or artist. Hell, why does Led Zep "reunite" occasionally. Why did Puff Daddy get to sample Zep songs? Jimmy and Robert and John don't need the bucks. Black Sabbath reunited simply for money. The Who's retirement tour lasted about 20 bloody years. KISS is about the same.

Heck, you aren't buying music, you are buying a product. I happen to think it isn't a quality product, based on what they were, what they became and what they are doing.

After you reach a certain level, it no longer becomes about money, it becomes about adulation from the masses. They get their kicks out of being on stage for arena shows and doing their thing. They aren't about money, they are about ego and will pay any price to have that ego stroked.

I'd much prefer they didn't care who was happy with their albums and made something new and innovative. When I was a young 'un, there were few bands who set trends or became the group everyone wanted to emulate. One of those was Metallica. I hear none of that on this track.

Where's the pathos? Where's the rage? Where's the social commentary? Where's that edge? I'll tell you where, it's wherever the hell they left their hair. It's over there, right by their creative spirit.

St. Anger is not innovative, it's not new, it's simply a repeat of a cycle. It's an attempt to be relevant, instead of setting the bar of what is or is not relevant.

Alana - 6-2-2003 at 04:48 AM

Sorry, Krydor. It was Slade who made the "rich corporate cocksuckers" remark, not you. My mistake.

I don't know if you're hearing St. Anger with different ears than mine, but I don't hear anything that sounds like something Metallica has done before. It, and "Frantic," the song they played at the MTV Icon show, have piqued my interest for the new album.

It's funny, I've read several reviews for the album; most are positive, some are negative. In the most negative one that I read, the reviewer starts out by saying that he dreaded listening to the album in the first place, and that they had lost their magic with the Black Album -- the guy went into the review expecting the music to suck, and so to him, it DID suck.

In all of the positive reviews that I've read so far, the reviewers said that they didn't know what to expect, and were shocked (yet pleased) with what they heard.

I'm seeing a pattern here; people who already think Metallica sucks don't like it, but people who listen to the album without expectations do like it.

So all I can say is listen to that album with an open mind before trashing it, like a lot of people have done already. I'll be doing the same, since I really don't know what to expect from it, except that it has no ballads, no solos, and is supposedly really heavy. Will I like it? I have no idea.

Ando - 6-2-2003 at 11:25 AM

I found this before, thought it made quite a good point for Load and ReLoad at the end of it.

Metallica - The coming of St Anger

To be honest I'm like a kid a couple of weeks out from Christmas at the moment, I'm all hyped up and excited counting the days to June 9th.

It's the kind of feeling you get when there is a big occasion just around the corner and the anticipation is almost too much.

It's hard to put into words exactly what a new Metallica album means to me as a fan but maybe it'll make more sense if I tell you what effect hearing Metallica for the first time had on me.

I was 15 and drinking a six pack of Joseph Khutze pilfered from the old mans stash, there were half a dozen or so of us around at a mates with a couple of girls. Now one of these girls was (I thought at the time) the most perfect being on the planet and I was infatuated to say the least, then my mate Adam put on (the turntable that is, showing my age here) Master of Puppets.
Master had only recently been released and I was in awe, never before had I heard any band encapsulate the passion, brutality and sheer pour your soul out intensity that 'Tallica managed. In comparison the Saxon's, Wasps and Maidens of my world were just limp shadows of the Metallica machine.

That was it, girls and beer were no longer that important (well beer was momentarily forgotten) and I was a convert by the time Jaymz was barking "Master, master where the dreams that I've been after".

Metallica are my all time favourite band, have been since that night in '87 and I've tattooed the ninja star on my right elbow as a badge of honour and notice that these guys continue to rock my world.

The thing that really stands out to me is that as I've grown, got older (31 this year) and moved on so have Metallica and you've got to admire that. It must be to easy to slip into a rut and churn out the same stuff over and over again (AC/DC, Iron Maiden) but Metallica have constantly challenged themselves and their fans by changing their sound a bit here and there and not being afraid to try something different. A lot of people slagged them off for some of the material they released on Load and Reload but I personally don't think they've ever let their standards slip, they've just been confident and brave enough to do what they want and who can blame them it's their band and their music.

So bring on St Anger and new bassist Robert Trujillo (ex Suicidal Tendencies, Infectious Grooves and Ozzy), the new album is supposed to be heavier than anything they've done in ages and amazingly contains no guitar solos!

It's Metallica doing whatever they want to do again and all power to them.

Slade - 6-2-2003 at 03:46 PM

The guy from that article Ando posted has no right to rip on AC/DC for released the same record over and over again. It's par tof their charm. No other band, except for The Ramones, can get away with that. In those two cases, releasing the same record over and over again, with new lyrics to sing along to is not a band thing. It's a good thing.

Anyway, so that I remain on topic. I have a question, though I doubt anybody will be able to answer it right now. My question is this: How in the hell can Metallica load up the record with songs that are all longer than 6 minutes (I think that's right, I can't remember) and have not a single guitar or drum solo on the record? Is it a matter of having too much to say, not knowing how to condense what they say, or having very long-winded instrumental parts in place of solos?

Alana - 6-2-2003 at 08:40 PM

News for the fans here: St. Anger is going to be released early!

Instead of June 10, it will be released on the 5th (yes, that's this Thursday).

I don't know when non-US residents will get it, Ando, so I'm not sure if this applies to you.

Ando - 6-3-2003 at 08:25 AM

I'd say America would be the biggest market, so I don't know why it wouldn't be released there in the first place, otherwise most of the potential market could've downloaded it from Europe or the South Pacific.

mallrat - 6-3-2003 at 09:35 AM says it will be a world wide release on the 5th except for Japan, they have to wait until the 6th.

Ando - 6-3-2003 at 10:34 AM

So I wonder, will I get it on the 5th (US time), which will be Fri 6th for me, or will I get it 5th NZ time? Oh well, the store will call me when it comes in.

mallrat - 6-4-2003 at 03:00 AM

With all of the protection they gave St. Anger it was officially released online this morning.

Alana - 6-4-2003 at 04:51 AM

Hell, they tried their best. It's pretty impressive that they could keep the album secret for that long.

Ando - 6-4-2003 at 07:21 AM

The dumbass at a record store I went to today said it was still gonna be released here on the 9th because of all the promotion they've done for it. Wankers.

salmonjunkie - 6-5-2003 at 01:03 AM

KROQ just played some of St. Anger. They played "Frantic", which sounds good. It's nice and crunchy. They also played excerpts from some other songs. I liked "Sweet Amber" and "Show Me Your Monster" and was intrigued a bit with "Shoot Me Again", was indifferent about "My World". There was another one they played a snippet of.

Their new sound is definitely stripped down from the over-produced sound of the Black Album, Load, and Reload, with heavier, crunching riffs and chord changes of their earlier material. I will definitely miss the guitar solos, though. I do not like the drums. Lars plays them fine, but it's the sound, or the production of it. They sound too loud, with too much echo, or reverb, or something. This is on every song. I'll either have to get used to it, or it'll bug the hell out of me.

Granted though, I'm listening to the radio on a tiny audiovox clock radio here at work, and not at a high volume, but I rarely complain about the way drums sound on this little shitbox, so take that however you wish.

I'll buy the album tomorrow. If anything because I'm a fucking lemming.

From what I've heard so far, I'll like this album, but it won't be my favorite.

[Edited on 6-5-2003 by salmonjunkie]

[Edited on 6-5-2003 by salmonjunkie]

metallikid - 6-5-2003 at 01:04 AM

Head over to and you can get a list of websites that each have one of the 11 tracks for yout to view. It is from their DVD that comes with St. Anger. I went to and watched "Invisible Kid" It was good. 9 minutes long and definatly wasn't nu metal like some people were trying to call St. Anger. Check it out if you can't wait until tommorrow.

ModSquad004 - 6-5-2003 at 01:59 AM

I agree, kid, that it doesn't sound like nu-metal, at least so far. However, there is one thing that makes it closer to nu-metal then metal of the 80s and early 90s: Lack of guitar solos.

metallikid - 6-5-2003 at 03:39 AM

Hammet was part of the writing process this time around. I guess they felt they didn't need it though.

Alana - 6-6-2003 at 04:59 AM

I got the album today, and for the most part, I really like it. A couple of the tracks, like "Some Kind of Monster," "Shoot Me Again," and "All Within My Hands" really didn't do it for me, but I pretty much love the other 8 tracks.

Dirty Window, Invisible Kid, and Sweet Amber are absolutely outstanding. I watched the DVD that came with it, too -- Kirk doing backup vocals? Wow. He really needs to stick to guitar. LOL.

salmonjunkie - 6-6-2003 at 08:31 AM

Kirk has such a baby voice, I couldn't imagine what his growling voice would be...

I got the album today, too. It's HEAVY! I don't miss the solos, really, and the drums... well, they weren't too bad. I mean, I dealt with the poor drum production of And Justice For All. The riffs are pretty heavy though, and I found myself headbanging when I was driving home from work today. I haven't headbanged in a decade!

So yeah, I'd recommend it. I can understand if some Metallica fans won't like this album, and I can probably understand why. It's not a throwback to Kill 'Em All. It's not innovative - but I honestly don't think Metallica has been innovative since Justice. I don't think they need to be, and I don't think they ever sought out to be, either. They just want to rock your balls off, and this album does indeed rock.

Slade - 6-6-2003 at 05:34 PM

Now that some people have the record, maybe you guys would be able to answer my question for me. If you do not know what that was, I will reprint the question right here for you:

How in the hell can Metallica load up the record with songs that are all longer than 6 minutes (I think that's right, I can't remember) and have not a single guitar or drum solo on the record? Is it a matter of having too much to say, not knowing how to condense what they say, or having very long-winded instrumental parts in their songs instead of solos?

salmonjunkie - 6-6-2003 at 05:54 PM

You'd just have to hear it, really, because it didn't sound feasable to me before I heard the album. Borrow it from a friend, since I know you won't buy it.

metallikid - 6-7-2003 at 12:07 AM

No solos just long instrumentals with all the instruments and drawn out verses and chorus. Actually it is so good I don't notice the lack of solos. There are good but not needed. St. Anger is extended 1:20 mostly repeated lines that were edited out of the radio edit.

salmonjunkie - 6-7-2003 at 03:38 AM

wow. Now that I've listened to this a 2nd time all the way through, I have to say...

I'm a bit dissapointed. I like many of the songs, I really do. However, this album is missing something. I'm not talking about the guitar solos. I'm not talking about the drum production. It's missing something.

Load and Reload, IMO, were missing something too, but that was more translated into their new sound. It wasn't as aggresive, didn't have that edge, yaddah yaddah yaddah. St. Anger is definitely more aggresive. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I don't like it - although I've found some songs I don't care for too much. It's just missing something. It's missing something that all the other albums, including the Loads, had. And I can't quite put my finger on what it is.

Alana - 6-7-2003 at 04:07 AM

junkie: I don't think that some of the lyrics are as good as before, perhaps because James isn't the only one writing them anymore. Think that might be it?

And to answer your question, Slade: they pulled off the no-solos thing very well. The best way I can describe it: soloing has been replaced by breaks in which the entire band jams together.

olfuzzybastard - 6-7-2003 at 04:22 AM

I've been a Metallica fan my entire life so it pains me to say this - "St. Anger" is festering pile of shit. It sounds like a fucking Korn album - they're even doing that cheesy nu-metal "menacing whisper" now. Every track sounds exactly the same, the lyrics are the worst ever, the production is terrible and the loss of the guitar solos hides the band's greatest strength.

It sounds like they were trying to please those old-school fans who threw away all their CDs when they cut their hair (who are going to listen to the disc with all the objectivity of Scott Keith watching a HHH match), while trying to please those lame-ass poseur white kids hanging around outside of Hot Topic in Slipknot t-shirts throwing up gang signs.

They wound up with a CD that's not too liable to please anyone. Except maybe Korn fans. And fuck them.

Alana - 6-7-2003 at 04:31 AM

Damn, man. Not a single track that you liked? I can only think of one line in the whole album with the "menacing whisper" thing that you mentioned.

I will say this about the album: I hate the production, after growing used to the fantastic sound that they got from the Black album on. However, the sound that the band got on St. Anger is exactly what they were going for: a raw, recorded-in-a-garage-demo feel. The production values are supposed to be "bad."

I really like most of the songs, and they're done in a way that I don't miss the guitar solos. And I would *love* to hear them play "Invisible Kid" and "Dirty Window" live.

Ah well. That's my two cents. I'm done posting in this thread.

bigfatgoalie - 6-7-2003 at 04:55 AM

Why is it that bad production is OK if that's what a band was going for? Seriously, Tom Petty and the Sttones have some raw sounding stuff...but it still has good production value!!!

Hell, the White Stripes have as raw a sound as you can get (even with using a cagillion effects to make a 6-string sound like a bass) and has good production values.

so far what I've heard (admittedly little) sounds like a bad mix job...espically the vocals and drums.

Ando - 6-7-2003 at 09:14 AM

Well, it aint released here til Monday, but today I heard, straight from Lars' mouth that they'll be coming to NZ in the first half of next year. They love The Datsuns and wanna play with them. WOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

Slade - 6-7-2003 at 09:23 PM

And why shouldn't they love The Datsuns? Those guys rock.

Thank you, Salmon, Alana and Metallikid for replying to my question. I'm glad to hear that what makes the songs long is longer intros, bridges, outros, or other 'jam' sections in the songs. If it was because the songs were were lyric heavy, or dense, I would consider that a problem. Lyrically dense songs never seem to work. The only band I can think of that can really pull it off is Pulp. It's a rarity. But with Pulp, it's more they're telling a short story that is accompanied by music when they write really long songs. It's not like a typical verse-chorus-verse-chorus style of song writing (or other variation of this style), which doesn't fair so well when it goes on and on and on and on. It's better that they didn't fall into that trap.

Ando - 6-8-2003 at 02:31 AM

Originally posted by Slade
And why shouldn't they love The Datsuns? Those guys rock.

Indeed, they do rock. My point was that they're NZers though, and that's probably one of the main reasons Metallica wanna come down this way.

Slade - 6-8-2003 at 03:40 PM

Why would they only go to New Zealand if they wanted to play with The Datsuns? Didn't you once say that The Datsuns aren't even based out of New Zealand anymore, or that they've left and haven't done a show there in ages?

Ando - 6-9-2003 at 06:33 AM

Yeah, something like that. I'm not sure where they're based, but they made it big overseas first. But fuck, they shouldn't forget their roots! Their only beef with NZ is that they didn't recieve funding from 'New Zealand On Air', not the fans. But then again, the govt can't be expected to give everyone cash just because they ask for it, even though in this case it was probably deserved.

Denethor - 6-9-2003 at 05:30 PM

My take was the opposite of salmons. upon first listen, i really didn't like any of the tracks except for invisible kid. after going through it a second time, i definitely liked the album better.

my biggest problem with it would be that I didn't feel the emotion from most of the tracks that you usually get from a metallica album. a LOT of repeated lyrics, which is not something they've done as much in the past. i like frantic and invisible kid a lot, but it didn't feel like the boys had a lot to say with this album.

2HoT - 6-9-2003 at 08:36 PM

Here is my clear and direct, three letter album review for Metallicas' St Anger:


2HoT - 6-9-2003 at 08:38 PM

but it didn't feel like the boys had a lot to say with this album.

Yeah they did! You could almost hear them screaming thru their duct taped mouthes "We're not IRRELEVANT"

sadly so few seem to realize...

metallikid - 6-9-2003 at 09:25 PM

After listening thorugh more then 5 times now I can honestly say that their is not one single song on the album that I dislike. While only a few stand out as truly great the album as a whole has got to be one of my favorites. Its heavy and I love it. The DVD with it is also great. By the way Dirty Window sounds much better live then on the CD for some reason so for those of you that haven't checked out the live DVD you should give it a good listen.

bigfatgoalie - 7-1-2003 at 08:36 PM

Edgeucation of Adam Copeland -- July 1, 2003

"On a final note, people have been asking me what I think of the new Metallica. I'm a huge fan, and I've tried and tried to like it, but I just can't. I never thought I'd give a Metallica album a thumbs-down, but both thumbs went south when I heard it."

I thought that was funny...EDGE LIKES EVERYTHING!!!!

2HoT - 7-1-2003 at 11:59 PM

Thanks for dragging out this equine corpse to give it yet another pointless kick.

bigfatgoalie - 7-2-2003 at 04:02 AM

I thought the edge thing was funny...would you prefer another thread??? I thought you were against that....

Shastar - 7-3-2003 at 12:02 AM

Originally posted by bigfatgoalie
Edgeucation of Adam Copeland -- July 1, 2003

"On a final note, people have been asking me what I think of the new Metallica. I'm a huge fan, and I've tried and tried to like it, but I just can't. I never thought I'd give a Metallica album a thumbs-down, but both thumbs went south when I heard it."

I thought that was funny...EDGE LIKES EVERYTHING!!!!

Actually, I've got to agree with Mr. Copeland here.

I was told repeatedly that, 'Oh, just give it a few listens, it'll grow on you!"

WEll, i gave it more than a few listens. I listened to it for two weeks, and, well, I can't say that I like it any more than when I heard 'St. Anger' and 'Dirty Window' on the rdio the first time and said, "Jesus, this sucks!"

Sorry to allt he Metallica faithful out there, I just ain't diggin the new wax...


Slade - 7-3-2003 at 02:38 AM

I thought the edge thing was funny...would you prefer another thread??? I thought you were against that....

No we don't want any new threads on this crap. We didn't want this one to resurfance in the first place. Nobody wants to take about Metallica anymore. We want to move on with our loves, to rebuild our tatter and torn relationships in an attempt to salvage them. We're trying to bring peace and love back to the Forums, and the only way to do this is to kill this stupid thread.

So, if there is a MOD reading this, I would like to ask you to close this thread so that it will never harm anybody ever again. I think we'd all agree that it is the best thing to do.

ModSquad004 - 7-3-2003 at 06:26 AM

Ok. Closing thread.

For the record, 004 thinks St. Anger sucks.