Is Metallica's St. Anger really that bad?

azurestormgod · 01-31-2009, 10:59 AM

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?

Seil · 01-31-2009, 11:41 AM

I like it.

Kim · 01-31-2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seil

I like it.

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

Bells · 01-31-2009, 01:04 PM

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!

Lost in Time · 01-31-2009, 03:19 PM

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.

azurestormgod · 01-31-2009, 03:55 PM

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

Fortune Zero · 01-31-2009, 07:00 PM

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.

Mondt · 01-31-2009, 07:03 PM

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

Fortune Zero · 01-31-2009, 07:21 PM

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

Mirai Gen · 01-31-2009, 10:37 PM

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.

01-31-2009, 10:59 AM	#1
azurestormgod Vampire Killer Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Behind you weegee stare Posts: 17	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? __________________

01-31-2009, 01:04 PM	#4
Bells That's so PC of you Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: In a Server-sided Dimension where time is meaningless Posts: 10,490	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! __________________ *BELLS STORE : Clothes! You wear* them! Free US Shipping Subscription System? WTF?! Zazzle Black!**

01-31-2009, 03:19 PM	#5
Lost in Time Fungus Among Us Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: On Your Nightstand Posts: 1,967	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. __________________ Eat me!

01-31-2009, 03:55 PM	#6
azurestormgod Vampire Killer Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Behind you weegee stare Posts: 17	Death Magnetic was very good. It seemed like a return to form in some cases. __________________

01-31-2009, 10:37 PM	#10
Mirai Gen We are Geth. Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 14,032	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. __________________

01-31-2009, 11:41 AM	#2
Seil Super stressed! Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: British Columbia Posts: 8,081	I like it.

01-31-2009, 07:00 PM	#7
Fortune Zero Is Big in Japan Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 175	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.

01-31-2009, 07:21 PM	#9
Fortune Zero Is Big in Japan Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 175	I am seriously in the belief that Lars kept the drums bad on purpose.