DoctorSoft

Slayer is waaaaaay better than Metallica IMO. I think the main reason I like them better is the vocals, James's rub me the wrong way.

Engine

Slayer. Here's why (keep in mind the year-old OP is deleted so I don't know what the main question is, if there is one)

First of all, everybody who has mentioned things like "Metallica's better b/c you wouldn't have even heard of Slayer if it weren't for Metallica" is full of shit. Well maybe that's true if you weren't yet born in the 80s, or were just recently born, but the truth is that any Metallica fan from when Metallica were good also knew Slayer from back than. Moving on..

Ulrich is bad drummerPERIOD Let alone for thrash. He's a lucky guy to have hooked up with Hetfield and Mustaine back when those guys started making music.

Lombardo, however, is a genius drummer. This goes for his work in Slayer and everything else he's done. Drums are the backbone of this music and Metallica never even had a good drummer.

Hammett is not a good guitarist. Many amateur guitarists could have suited Metallica just as well. Here's proof:

I know he studied under Steve Vai or some other wanker but, along with Ulrich, he's lucky to have hooked up with Hetfield and Burton. Otherwise nobody would know who he is at all. Instead he's one of the most famous metal guitarists in the world. Right place at the right time I guess.

I could go on but I'm getting bored. Metallica is a good band. I liked them a lot as a kid but Slayer generally kicks their ass all over the place all of the time.

Slayer.

__________________

Like an arrow,
I was only passing through.

The Batlord

My point is not that the songs are melodic or accessible. My point is that "Enter Sandman" is a cheap radio hit that sounds like a metalized version of Foreigner. It's tailor made to have a big riff to be played in a big venue to a bunch of *******s who would be just as happy moshing to Limp Bizkit or Linkin Park.

The differences are not overemphasized. When I was sixteen, The Black Album ruled my bitch ass. I didn't have the attention span or maturity to really get why Metallica's earlier **** was better. Now that I'm twenty four, The Black Album is cheap, boring, and just sounds like it was made for people who weren't old enough to drink (who just happen to be the only people I ever meet who think it's their best album). Sure, every now and again I listen to The Black Album for a change of pace, but halfway through the album, I'm already bored to tears and ready to put it up for another year or two. I still regularly listen to their first four albums (well, mostly 2nd, 3rd, and 4th), even a decade after I first started listening to them because they still sound fresh and make my head bang even when I try to sit still, but the Black Album got stale about five years ago.

__________________

LOLPOCALYPSE

I can see that, as I don't like "Enter Sandman" at all. But as I said earlier, I don't think the Black Album should be judged for its first three singles. And I think the main point is that "One" suffers from nearly the same problem (yes, even the thrashy latter half). Whether on purpose or not (and despite being a much better song), "One" has become a cheap radio hit on its own. Its sound isn't really "non-cheap/non-mainstream" enough to make a huge difference. I'm not trying to say The Black Album is better, I'm just saying the differences aren't so huge.

About the differences:
Like I said earlier, I don't think it is their best. It is their worst besides Saint Anger and ReLoad. But the initial argument that I jumped into was that AJFA and The Black Album weren't that different. I would agree though, that The Black Album sounds very different from albums 1, 2, and 3. The only glaring difference between AJFA and The Black Album is song lengths.

I think a parallel could be drawn between Metallica and In Flames. In Flames had a Black Album of sorts, Reroute to Remain. It is the album that lost some "fans" and gained a whole crap load of new ones. It also triggered a new direction for the group, one that happened to be more commercially successful. The previous album, Clayman, is very much like AJFA. It was only slightly different than Colony, but hinted at a change in the future, especially with songs like "Only for the Weak" (which you could say was the "One" of the album). As a result, R2R was indeed a change for the band, but it still sounded like In Flames at the end of the day. While many cite R2R as the transitional album, I would say it is closer to the first of the "new" In Flames sound (and it produced the first radio single as well). Clayman was the transitional album, much like AJFA was for Metallica. It sounded a lot like Colony before it, but also sounded like R2R. R2R, however, sounds nothing like anything pre-Clayman.

The Batlord

You're making it sound like Metallica was a "trve metal" band before And Justice for All. They'd been flirting with non-thrash songs long before. About half of Ride the Lightning was melodic, in fact it was a much more radio friendly album than AJFA. Of course Master of Puppets had "Sanitarium". "One" was not a departure for the band, it was just more of the experimentation that they'd been doing since their second album. It wasn't even as melodic as "Fade to Black".

Someone mentioned that "Sad but True" was just another "Harvester of Sorrow", but they'd been making heavy, midtempo songs for years. "Leper Messiah" and "The Thing that Should Not Be" off Master of Puppets, and "Seek and Destroy" from Kill 'Em All.

I agree that they'd been flirting with commerciality before The Black Album, but they'd never let their core sound become as compromised, simplified, and stale as on The Black Album. Superficially it did sound like a Metallica record, but in fact it really sounds almost nothing like the Metallica of old.

__________________

LOLPOCALYPSE

Don't worry, I would never use the term trve metal as a compliment. I still wouldn't say any flirtations were as strong as when "One" was released. Everything surrounding its creation seemed to have a more commercial vibe about it. Metallica, after being openly against MTV, broke down and made a music video for "One". Once against the media and MTV, you now have a band that has its own edition of the Guitar Hero video game. Interesting...

Anyway, I still don't think that the change in sound was as radical as it is made out to be (and it should have been expected, as I said, with the increasing popularity from the previously most accessible album, AJFA). AJFA sounds as arena-ready as any later Metallica releases, even if it was not intentional. "One" equally provides a gateway for those Limp Bizkit type listeners you mentioned before. I don't think the other previous melodic songs were nearly as accessible, as proven by initial sales and recognition of AJFA. It sold more than previous albums not because the band was growing a thrashy fanbase but rather because it was the most accessible Metallica album of the time. The Black Album was just the next step.

Metal Connoisseur

I 110% agree with you on your thoughts concerning Lombardo over Lars. But Kirk not being a good guitarist? I can't buy into that. That video was funny but at the same time It doesn't discredit his entire body of work and decades of guitar playing. Who would you say is better and why?

Janszoon

I had no idea Jeff Bridges was now playing bass for Metallica.

__________________
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die

last.fm

Unknown Soldier

This is just embarrassing and Dave Mustaine must be thinking WTF! Poor old Hammett needs to sort his hair out as well.

Engine

I see what you mean. For the record, I love the first four Metallica albums. Hammett is not a "bad" guitar player at all. His solos go with the music well and add to it. And I'm sure that he was just going through some kind of rough patch in that video. Still, I expect that a seasoned guitarist like himself would be able to figure out how to play a simple riff more easily than that.

As for comparison, let's look at Kerry King. I won't say he's a "better" guitarist than Hammett but, to me, he makes Slayer a more interesting band than Metallica. His lead work is just insane. His solos are pure emotion and usually have nothing to do with the song structure. He just goes wild and plays chaotic nonsense that nobody could teach. It's just another reason I like Slayer better.

Haha. Very true and I'm sure Mustaine's been thinking the same way since the early 80s. This is for a different thread but I think Mustaine's jealousy + drug addiction kind of ruined Megadeth. He's so much better than Hammett. Hetfield and Mustaine together as guitarists could have made such a better band than Metallica ever were.

__________________

Like an arrow,
I was only passing through.