Originally Posted by SATCHMO

I can definitely see them being at the bottom of anyone's list for the sake of there lackluster career. I actually think that Spreading the Disease was actually a great album as well, but to call them gimmicky is too much. Their crossover, heavily punk-influenced style definitely reflected their influences (they're the only band out of the four not from California, and their sound is definitely very reflective of the New York punk sound that preceded them). But what was their gimmick, the fact that they actually had a distinct sound and didn't wear out the same tired metal cliches that everyone else did? To call them the forerunners of nu-metal is a pretty heinous statement, although I can see where you arrived at that. I mean they did cover the Public Enemy songBring the Noise, but they also covered Joe Jackson's Got the Time. How Brilliant is that?

Anthrax was a band that wasn't afraid to wear their unconventional influences on their sleeves. I think a song about a comic book character trumps ten songs about death and every other evil, morbid cliche made available on a slayer album. I honestly believe that Scotty Ian was the greatest heavy metal guitar player, simply because he devoted himself to churning out riffs that were just amazing in their off kilter timing and pure 'beefiness'. They certainly defied the conventional 'chugging' that everyone else was doing at the time, and is still doing in a much more extreme manner.

To throw them at the bottom of the list is understandable.The other bands on the list definitely have had more consistent and higher quality output over the span of their careers, or in the case with Metallica the first half of their career, but to call them gimmicky and the forerunners of new metal. That's crazy.

Oh, and I think John Bush era Anthrax was terrible. I got a chance to see him with Armored Saint and it was one of the the best metal shows I've ever seen.