Is Metallica's St. Anger really that bad?
 

I will go out and say this, I freaking love Metallica but most people complain about one of its recent 2000's albums, St. Anger. I listened to some of it's songs and they don't sound that bad, the drums sound different and there were no solos(from what I heard) but it was not bad. So what made people hate this album so much?

I like it.

This really tells me all I need to know about St. Anger.

well, a official seil review is a official review...

Anyways... it's not BAD, it's just not their best work. I mean, i really dislike the drums... but you know how fanboys are... anything new is "SUUUUUUCKZ THAIUR SELLOUTZ!"

But metallica is one of those bands that has SO much money that they are ALLOWED to fuck up everynow and then, as in, it wont matter. A bad album wont reduce the number os shows they have and wont take enough 0's out of their paycheck to actually matter

So, rock on!

Ok, I like Metallica, I like most their albums, and if they were coming to my town, I'd go see them. But I hate St. Anger. So much, it really does hurt the ears, the raw sound wasn't a bad idea, but it's just banging trash cans and and strained vocals.

Death Magnetic was good though, I'll say that.

Death Magnetic was very good. It seemed like a return to form in some cases.

St. Anger's not awful by any stretch of the imagination, and really, it's better than alot of other rock albums that came out the same year. It stacks up poorly against other Metallica albums, though. Metallica fans demand absolute perfection, and given that the most bloodthirsty of fans think the band stopped being good around Justice for All...

...Well, you're going to hear alot of criticism. It did take me some getting used to, and it's definitely Metallica's worst album, but it's not bad on its own merits. I mostly blame Lars and his stupid drums. Not enough guitar solos, not enough of James actually singing... but damn if there's not DRUMS. EVERYWHERE. BEING LOUD. AGH.

But yeah, you just gotta realize that Metallica fans are mostly mouth breathing, unemployed heathens that communicate with a system of grunts. Alot of what I heard concerning St. Anger was the same stuff I heard leveled toward Load, ReLoad, Black Album, and now Death Magnetic. You just have to listen for yourself and decide what you like, especially when it comes to rock music--because a good portion of the time, rock music fans are idiots, and their opinions are going to sound absolutely crazy.

Long story short, St. Anger's not bad, but it's bad for Metallica.

The drums bit is just poor producing. I think anyone in the studio at the time should have seen that.

I am seriously in the belief that Lars kept the drums bad on purpose.

As I understand it, it was Metallica's departure from the genre they practically created with Slayer - Thrash - that pissed off lots of fans, which is why they basically went right back to basics with Death Magnetic.

This is from a metalhead friend of mine, so don't quote me.

metallica is by far one of my favor bands but i agree with the people who say its sucks. it doesnt suck in the sense that it is complete garbage, i mean being used to the sounds they've produced before its just a bloody let down man.

not a fan of it
 

Yes.

James's signing sounds shoddy and half-assed.
The lyrics are.. well, not the best, but not the worst.
trash-can lid drums
no exciting solos; Hell, no solos at all (why waste Kirk's talents?)
The album as a whole does a great job of blending together into one, bland series of un-inspiring dirty guitar riffs on top of lame yell-talking.

Death Magnetic** at least feels like a more natural connection between Metallica now and Metallica as they were prior to its release, coming from Load/ReLoad.


** though this album is plagued by the guitar track(s) drowning out most everything else, especially the singing, making it a departure from the previous quality of their albums (for more, just look up how many people are downloading and ripping the music from Guitar Hero instead of the album)

The Direction taken in St. Anger is the logical continuation of what Metallica started with Garage Days Revisited. Basically stepping it up from covers and nostalgia from when Metallica wasnt a polished, experienced, multi-platinum band; to actually playing and producing like they were still in a garage, in their formative days. I'd have to agree that it probably was intended to be a little bad. Lars doesnt play drums like that. Hammet is better at guitar than that. Trujillo was new to the band, but wasnt new at all. And Hetfield can certainly sing better and write more imaginative lyrics now. Just listen to Death Magnetic, for proof.

With that said, I agree that it isnt a good album, by most standards. I cant stand to listen to most of the songs, and I only passably like Saint Anger, the title track. Its just not that good. Butyou can kind of see where they were going with it.

So as pretty much everyone has said, it doesn't suck, it's just not Master Of Puppets.

However, people have been bashing on every new album Metallica has put out since Load, so I'm not too surprised. What DOES surprise me is that Death Magnetic is getting great reviews all around, which leads me to believe that it could compete with albums like ...And Justice For All and Ride The Lightning.

(Have I named enough albums in this post? :D)

Actually, I'm not saying its even good. I'm just describing why they would even start to think it was good.

Raw sound and sparse lyrics doesnt begin to describe why its wrong. Old-school punk had raw sound and (usually) sparse lyrics, and St. Anger still doesnt begin to compare.
Basically, the best I could describe it is, its like Metallica wrote some lyrics on a napkin, and an hour later, each band member went to a separate studio and played their intruments alone, for an agreed upon length od song, then made a mix of it. Its as if they werent even trying to produce an album with coherence, they just played their instruments for the hell of playing them, and didnt try to make a uniform flow and sound together.