FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


The Big Four Tour... I've had it with Metallica





Afaceinthematrix
Over the years, I've tried putting up with Metallica. First it was them selling out with The Black Album, Load, Reload, and St. Anger. Then it was them cutting their hair. Then there were their live performances (out of the hundreds of bands I've seen live, Metallica has been one of the worst live... And what annoyed me was that everyone thought they were so incredible live, but then again, most of their fans aren't metal and haven't actually seen a good metal band live... Most of them say that's the only concert they've ever gone to)... Terrible. But this really takes the cake. Because of this, I will never again buy Metallica CDs/merchandise, I will absolutely never see them again (unless they're at an Ozzfest or something). As a matter of fact, I wish I could run into Lars Urich or James Hetfield just so that I could spit in their face!

Quote:
Metallica don’t have another film coming out, per se, but the June 22 stop on the band’s “Big Four” tour at the Sonisphere Festival in Sofia, Bulgaria will be beamed to over 450 theaters in the U.S., Canada and Latin America.

The film will feature the full sets from all four of the tour’s heavy-hitters—Metallica, Slayer, Megadeth and Anthrax—which involves 75 minutes of Metallica and 45 minutes of the other three.

Tickets are now on sale here and the film will air live at 7:30 PM local time. It will also be shown in Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, although not live. The June 22 concert is one stop on the “Big Four” tour, which will make its way around Europe throughout June, and sadly will not be coming to The States.

Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich said in a statement, “Who would have thought that more than 25 years after its inception, thrash metal’s Big Four would not only still be around, be more popular than ever, playing shows together at stadiums all over Europe, and on top of that, coming to a movie theater near you in High Definition (for better or worse??!!). Bring it on!”

We admire Ulrich’s excitement and, must admit, he raises a good point: How great will these dudes look in HD?


http://www.myspace.com/music/blog/2010/05/metallicas-big-four-tour-coming-to-movie-theaters-around-the-world

I was googling information about the tour and I came across this article (and several others that said the same information) and it absolutely disgusts me. Many people have been looking forward to "The Big Four Tour." It was supposed to be a Metallica, Slayer, Anthrax, and Megadeth tour that was supposed to celebrate their musical achievements and history. But now, it isn't a big four tour anymore - it is a Metallica tour with the other bands as a supporting act! How come Metallica gets a 1 hr 15 min set and the rest of the bands get 45 mins? How come Metallica gets a full half hour longer than the rest? They should NOT be a headlining band... The other three should NOT be supporting bands... This ISN'T supposed to be Metallica's tour... So why are they headlining it? They should all get an equal time (maybe 1 hr each) and they should switch the order up...

Making Metallica a headlining band and the rest of the big four a supporting act really undermines the other bands own musical achievements. That's what really makes me the most mad. Screw Megadeth and their Peace Sells... But Who's Buying, Rust In Peace (which was better than anything Metallica ever made), Endgame, etc. Screw Slayer and their South of Heaven, Reign in Blood, God Hates Us All, etc. (and Slayer is a much better band that hasn't sold out and that is really incredible live)... It's Metallica! They're completely undermining their achievements.

Although I sort of suspected this from the beginning because Metallica are babies that won't do a show do a show unless they're headlining it. That's why, from the beginning (when this was announced a few months ago), I argued that Metallica should be replaced with another thrash band like Kreator, Exodus, Testament, Skeletonwitch, etc. Not only would the show be better (because I've seen all of those bands except Kreator and they were all better), but it would be cheaper (Metallica won't perform except for huge amounts of money - I've seen them charge up to 6 times more for a ticket than Slayer or Megadeth).

Metallica is finished. Their music has sucked for years. They've sold out. They aren't metal anymore. Their live performances are a joke. And most importantly, they're a bunch of freakin' divas.
adri
Oh my God, you changed your avatar. Laughing


Quote:
Metallica is finished. Their music has sucked for years. They've sold out. They aren't metal anymore. Their live performances are a joke. And most importantly, they're a bunch of freakin' divas.


Totally agree, but actually I never liked Metallica. Razz (I'm more into Rammstein if I had to choose a metalband)


Adri
Afaceinthematrix
adri wrote:
Oh my God, you changed your avatar. :lol:


Quote:
Metallica is finished. Their music has sucked for years. They've sold out. They aren't metal anymore. Their live performances are a joke. And most importantly, they're a bunch of freakin' divas.


Totally agree, but actually I never liked Metallica. :P (I'm more into Rammstein if I had to choose a metalband)


Adri


Haha.... I changed my avatar some time ago. Although I never had a Metallica avatar because I had some huge like for the band... I had that avatar because the skulls on it were freakin' awesome. It just happened to say Metallica. Had it said almost any band I still would have used it because I liked the skulls. But then I found this Slayer avatar and changed to it because this one is just as cool because of the pentagram and stuff and then you add the Slayer to it and it instantly becomes a zillion times cooler.

And Rammstein is okay. They are nothing that great in my opinion. They are just industrial metal. I do appreciate the influence they have had on German music. But as far as German music goes, I would much rather listen to Equilibrium* and Kreator**.

And I used to like Metallica. If you forget that they existed after ...And Justice For All then they are a great band. That album was good and the stuff that they made with Cliff Burton was amazing. And it isn't just the music that's gone downhill - their live performances have also. I would much rather hear Slayer for an hour and fifteen minutes than have to watch Metallica for that long. James Hetfield always interacts with the crowd but he sucks at doing it, he's completely non-metal when doing it, and it's embarrassing. I remember watching them one time and these were some of the things he said:

How many here have seen Metallica before? Wow, we have a bunch of Metalivirgins (he actually said that). Now we're all one big happy Metallica family!

(To a kid in the front using a baby voice): How old are you? Eleven? Twelve? I'm forty-six!

Anaheim! You make us feel so good! And we hope we make you feel good!

Not only was he annoying, so were the fans. My friend and I, before the show, were talking about real metal bands and there was only one person there who knew what we were talking about. The mosh pits were also pathetic. I've been in pits where people have gone to the hospital and the Metallica pits were a bunch of little kids pushing each other around.

Whereas Slayer, a great live band, has amazing shows. Last time I saw them Tom Araya beat up a fan that jumped onto stage from the pit... The pits are also brutal.

But more than everything, as I have explained, it isn't just that Metallica has lost it. It's mostly that this tour is supposed to be the big four tour which celebrates all of their achievements. But by Metallica playing a full half hour longer than everyone else, it's turned into a Metallica tour with everyone else being a supporting band and that really undermines everyone else's musical achievements (which are mostly better) and undermines the integrity of the tour...


* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrium_%28band%29
** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreator
Ankhanu
"They've sold out" always makes me laugh... it's as though people believe that these people aren't making music to earn money in the first place Razz Face it, almost every big name act is in it for the money (they love the music too, but they sold out to get their contracts and lost a lot of their own creative control) and sold out when they signed on the dotted line (with a few notable exceptions). Musicians have no more integrity than anyone else Razz

That said, I've been thinking about just this subject, and Metallica specifically recently too. Metallica's changed a lot over the years, and, yeah, the stuff they've put out in the past 15 years or so has been garbage... really, I'm surprised they haven't changed more through their career. As a musician myself, I can't imagine playing the same songs for years upon years upon years. In the time that Metallica's been playing the same sort of garbage metal, my musical tastes and what I like to play have changed several times. I don't really know other musicians who haven't likewise changed their perspectives as they've gotten older. Forcing the same sort of music out of a musician and not expecting change is ASKING them to sell out, just you want them to sell to you and not someone else... YOU want a specific product and YOU want them to sell it to you... and if the product changes, they've "sold out".

Change is good, it keeps music and musicians vital... it's when they try to not change that the "sell out" BS gets in full swing. Why? Because the music isn't coming from the heart anymore, it's coming from an attempt to appease a market... and the fans are the market place. Ya gotta let bands change, or else you end up with old dudes who aren't metal any more trying to be metal and failing to the level of epic that Metallica has.
liljp617
Never had anything against them and still listen to them on a daily basis. Hammett needs to go though. Their lead work is absolutely atrocious now, his tone sucks beyond sucking, and he hasn't played an original solo riff in 15 years. Death Magnetic was respectable until his solos came in...sounds like he's playing Guitar Hero.

But yeah, Cliff's death will always be what people pin their downfall on. I imagine Maiden would also be horrible of Steve Harris suddenly died, given he basically writes all their music or plays a significant role in what every member does from song to song.

I don't care to label them sell outs. I think they play what they feel, and I think they still have great respect for music. Hell, James hates St. Anger but he's stated many times that he had to make a record where he could just throw up all the shit he was holding in after the alcohol and rehab issues. I respect that, and I think a lot of the blame for how bad it is also goes on Bob Rock.


The sets should be equally timed, although I would like to hear the reason why all four bands agreed on the way it is (surely they agreed, or there would most definitely be fighting amongst the groups...they never hesitated to shit on each other in the past).
todabeat
the lost me, since St.Anger
Afaceinthematrix
Ankhanu wrote:
That said, I've been thinking about just this subject, and Metallica specifically recently too. Metallica's changed a lot over the years, and, yeah, the stuff they've put out in the past 15 years or so has been garbage... really, I'm surprised they haven't changed more through their career. As a musician myself, I can't imagine playing the same songs for years upon years upon years. In the time that Metallica's been playing the same sort of garbage metal, my musical tastes and what I like to play have changed several times. I don't really know other musicians who haven't likewise changed their perspectives as they've gotten older. Forcing the same sort of music out of a musician and not expecting change is ASKING them to sell out, just you want them to sell to you and not someone else... YOU want a specific product and YOU want them to sell it to you... and if the product changes, they've "sold out".


Not at all. A sell out makes a product aimed up what the most amount of people will spend money on with the intentions of making money instead of having the intentions of making good music and making what they want.

Plenty of bands that I would never label as sellouts have made products that I do not like. As a matter of fact, almost no band has made nothing but music that appeals to me. You cannot have universal popularity. But as long as it is musically strong (extensive knowledge and applications of music theory is necessary) and it was made because of pure intentions - and not commercial intentions - then it is not selling out. For instance, my second favorite band is Slayer. Have I liked every album they have made? Not really. I'm not a huge fan of Seasons of the Abyss (except for War Ensemble) because I think it is a little too slow and I'm not a huge fan of Christ Illusion (except for Cult). Those albums aren't really my style. When I see Slayer live and they play those songs I don't mind it, but I'd much rather them play something else. Another good example is my third favorite band, Children of Bodom. I didn't really like their last album, Blooddrunk. It was okay, but it wasn't really my style. Have they sold out? No.

I have very strict guidelines for selling out and it doesn't include a band making something other than my preference of songs.

Quote:
The sets should be equally timed, although I would like to hear the reason why all four bands agreed on the way it is (surely they agreed, or there would most definitely be fighting amongst the groups...they never hesitated to shit on each other in the past).


I have been wondering that too. I'm especially surprised that Kerry King didn't say anything because he's extremely outspoken. After he found out that Rick Ruben was producing Death Magnetic (and Rick Ruben has been Slayer's producer since their 1986 album Reign in Blood) he said that it was a "Slap in the f***ing face" and that "Metallica is a sinking ship." If I had been in one of the other bands, I would have refused to play on the tour unless that is changed. If it was a Metallica tour and Metallica asked them to be supporting bands, then that's one thing. That's no big deal. But the fact of the matter is that it's a BIG FOUR tour and it's supposed to celebrate all of their musical achievements and this is completely undermining them. That's really why I am mad here... It's turning into a Metallica tour instead of the Big Four tour as promised.

Quote:
I don't care to label them sell outs. I think they play what they feel, and I think they still have great respect for music.


If that is true then I would not label them as sellouts. But the fact of the matter is that I cannot force myself to believe that. I truly believe that they saw huge success with the Black Album and got corrupted by money...
mOrpheuS
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
This ISN'T supposed to be Metallica's tour... So why are they headlining it? They should all get an equal time (maybe 1 hr each) and they should switch the order up...

I thought it WAS indeed Metallica's tour.

The "Big Four" ? The "Bigger Three and the Biggest One" is how it's mostly been.
Metallica might be sellouts, but atleast they know how to sell.


liljp617 wrote:
I would like to hear the reason why all four bands agreed on the way it is (surely they agreed, or there would most definitely be fighting amongst the groups...they never hesitated to shit on each other in the past).


Dave Mustaine wrote:
Of course, METALLICA's success really put them in a kind of unapproachable position where they were just so high in stature, we kind of were all left behind, if you know what I mean.
...
Now, I don't know that, because of the stature of METALLICA versus [the other three bands], if it would really be a balanced kind of four-way show, you know what I'm saying? . . . [But] I'm not gonna rule anything out. And as much as I'm trying to tap-dance around in this, it's just gossip and rumors. It would be foolish of me as a businessman to not take that opportunity, and it would be dumb of me as a bandleader to not do that for the guys in my group and for the fans of the band.
Ankhanu
I suppose, Afaceinthematrix, what I'm getting at is that the concept of "selling out" is a fairly subjective one. One could accuse an artist of selling out for changing and staying true to themselves, if not their past, or one could accuse an artist of selling out for remaining the same through the years... one could accuse an artist of selling out simply by getting into a recording contract that removes their creative control over their music (which is quite common)... It comes down to perspective.
Afaceinthematrix
Ankhanu wrote:
I suppose, Afaceinthematrix, what I'm getting at is that the concept of "selling out" is a fairly subjective one. One could accuse an artist of selling out for changing and staying true to themselves, if not their past, or one could accuse an artist of selling out for remaining the same through the years... one could accuse an artist of selling out simply by getting into a recording contract that removes their creative control over their music (which is quite common)... It comes down to perspective.


Generally, "selling out" has a pretty standard definition among people with musical integrity. If you care more about money than making the best music that you can then you're a sellout. If you give creative control of your music to a record company, then you're a sellout.

I remember watching an old Cliff Burton (someone who I truly believe would never have sold out) interview that was made shortly before the release of Master of Puppets. He said something along the lines of people, already at that point, believing that Metallica had sold out because they signed with a major record label. However, he said that they haven't sold out because they're still staying true to themselves and making the same music. They proved that by following up with Master of Puppets and then ...And Justice For All.

I don't think anyone would accuse an artist of selling out based only on the fact that they haven't changed throughout the year or that they haven't changed throughout the year. People would just label them as versatile or not versatile.
gverutes
at this point it isn't about the music for them. they are just trying to make money and stay relevant...the latter of which they are becoming less and less of each day!
liljp617
gverutes wrote:
at this point it isn't about the music for them. they are just trying to make money and stay relevant...the latter of which they are becoming less and less of each day!


Quote:
Death Magnetic debuted at number one on the Billboard 200, selling 490,000 copies in just three days of availability.[55] It is the band's fifth consecutive studio album to debut at number one, making Metallica the first band to have five consecutive studio album releases to debut at number one. The album marked the highest first week sales for the group since 1996's Load.[3][56]

According to Billboard Magazine, in the September 27, 2008 issue, Death Magnetic landed at number one on the following ten charts: Billboard Top 200, Billboard Comprehensive Albums, Top Rock Albums, Top Hard Rock Albums, Top Modern Rock/Alternative Albums, Top Digital Albums, Top Internet Albums, Top European Albums, Tastemakers, and Hot Mainstream Rock Tracks ("The Day That Never Comes").[57] The album stayed at number one for three consecutive weeks on the Billboard 200. The album spent 50 consecutive weeks on the Billboard 200 chart[58]. Internationally, the album peaked at number one in 34 countries, including Ireland, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia.[59]

According to The Rock (a New Zealand radio station) the album became platinum on the first day of its release in New Zealand.[citation needed] In addition, nearly 60,000 copies were sold digitally, making it debut at number one on the Digital Album chart.[60] The album debuted at number one in the official United Kingdom albums chart after just three days of availability, selling 75,164 copies. The album remained at number one for two weeks and has sold over 150,000 copies to date.[61] In Canada, Death Magnetic was the number one album for four consecutive weeks, bringing its total sales of 240,000 units sold and became certified 3x platinum.[62]

In Australia, Death Magnetic was the fastest selling album of 2008, selling 55,877 copies in its first full week of release.[63] Death Magnetic was Australia's highest-selling record in one week since Australian Idol winner Damien Leith's The Winner's Journey, in December 2006.[64] The same success was repeated in Germany, where Death Magnetic has become the fastest selling album of 2008. Within the first three days of the album's release, Death Magnetic sold over 100,000 copies and has been certified platinum.[65] According to reports, Death Magnetic is outselling competitors in Russia and Turkey, two countries which don't have an official album chart.[66]

In Finland, during the second week of January 2009, Death Magnetic jumped eighteen spots back up to number one on that country's album charts within one week.[67] As of January 2009 the album has sold more than 4 million copies.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Magnetic#Sales_and_impact

This not even considering how they're older albums are selling in the present day.

They were nominated for four Grammy Awards and won two of them. They're tours still continue to be greatly successful. I would have to argue they're still one of, if not the most, well known metal band in the world.

I think those facts are evidence that they're still greatly relevant, whether or not their music has supposedly gone downhill. They're still going strong as a musical act from a success perspective. When your album peaks at #1 in 34 countries, you're still relevant to the music industry.
Afaceinthematrix
^^I think it depends on who you talk to and what group you're referring to. Record sales are based on how many people the music appeals to and Grammy's are the same.

You really need to divide this into two groups of people: Metalheads as a part of the Metal Community and the general music listener that likes some metal. You see, there's a huge difference between a metal head and someone who listens to music. There's a lifestyle of a difference.

Metallica makes music that is less extreme than many other forms of metal and so it appeals to a much wider audience. So to much of the general public, Metallica will be relevant. But what about other bands such as Children of Bodom and Amon Amarth? Most people have not heard of them.

Is Metallica relevant to death metal? No. Bands like Children of Bodom, Cannibal Corpse, etc. are highly relevant there.

Viking metal? No. Bands like Amon Amarth are.

Folk Metal? No. But Ensiferum, Blackguard, etc. are.

Black metal? No. Bands like Bathory, Behemoth, and Skeletonwitch (all though they're closer to Blackened thrash).

Thrash metal? Well, to most metalheads, bands like Slayer and Kreator are the most relevant.

I go to many, many metal shows. The last show I went two was two weeks ago. The bands Hypocrisy, Hate, Blackguard, Swashbuckle, and Scar Symmetry (Scar sucked). A few weeks previously I saw Amon Amarth with Eluvietie. I was at a show the previous week also. At these shows, I see many, many people. You know that these people are hardcore metalheads because they know about many bands in the underground scene. Many "die hard" Metallica fans will most likely know about Metallica, Iron Maiden, and Sabbath. That's about the extensiveness of their metal knowledge. So to them, Metallica will be relevant. Ask the people at these shows, they'll tell you hell no. Evidence of this is that I have never seen a Metallica shirt worn at a non-Metallica show. Every other band that I listed above I have seen people wearing their shirts.

Metallica has really alienated themselves from the metalhead community and appealed to many people outside of that community.

I will still talk about Metallica personally because I hold Ride the Lightning in extremely high esteem. I'm not the type of metalhead that will not give them credit where credit is due (I even had a Metallica avatar for about a year - although I had it because I thought the skulls were cook). But are they relevant to the metal community? Not since the 80's... I can list hundreds of bands that I've seen that put on a better live show and that are putting out better music today.
liljp617
Am I Evil w/ members from all four bands -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AdzqU4I1MM
Afaceinthematrix
If the tour ever happens in the U.S. and they come to So.Cal. (which they probably will because the one and only thing that I like about this place is that every band you can think of comes to LA/Hollywood area...) then I hope they do this. The reason why I hope they do it (because it isn't for the song - it doesn't sound any better with all of them together) is simply so that I can see Mustaine playing on the same stage as Hammett and everything remaining civil...

On a second note, I am disappointed that Slayer wasn't represented there (or did I just miss it? I didn't see Lombardo, Araya, King, or Hanneman). Although I suppose that Lombardo could have been there... The camera wasn't focusing too much on the drummers so I only noticed Ulrich, Drover, and Anthrax's drummer (I don't know his name because I do not like Anthrax). Okay, so I think I did get a glimpse of Lombardo in the back... So Sayer was represented. But still, no Araya, Hanneman, or King?

After doing some research, it turns out that Scott Ian also helped Megadeth with Peace Sells.

So it sounds like it was a success...
liljp617
I got the video off an ultimate-guitar.com article and a lot of people in the comments said Hanneman or Araya (can't remember which one) came out at some point, but KK was completely non-present.
bjwok
Afaceinthematrix, it seems from your original post (and your follow ups) that the issue isn't really about metallica as a band anymore, it's more about how you conceive the band should act, what they should record, how they should style themselves and how they should curtail their creativity.

you've mentioned a few times about being "metal" and some of the antics of metallica on and off-stage are not "metal" (your wording) anymore.

i'd argue that trying to be something, trying to fit into some kind of preconceived notion of conformity, whatever form it may take is your real issue.

i'm sure when metallica started jamming as a bunch of mates back in the day they just did what they felt came naturally to them (just like any other band - no matter the genre: be it pop, grunge, industrial whatever). they didn't sit down and work out what would make them more "metal", they just play the music they wanted to play.

the trouble is, people like yourself get upset when the bands ideas and goals differ from what you had planned for them. of course they are going to sign to a label if and when they are offered. you think these guys want to work day jobs when clearly their passion and talent was music?

when did success become selling out?

and for the record, i completely agree with you that ride the lighting, master of puppets and justice for all are the only decent metallica albums. the albums that followed were utter rubbish. as if load wasn't bad enough, they then give us re-load? goodness me...

the difference with me and you is that i'm happy to watch from a distance as they take their downward spiral. realistically it doesn't make a difference in anyway to my life. i'll still whack on justice and crank it to 10 from time to time.

as for the big four tour i do agree with you that the time slots should be equal, however if your distaste for metallica is that strong the solution is pretty simple: leave before their set.

p.s. what has a haircut got to do with being "metal"?
p.p.s. what has the way fans act in a mosh got to do with being "metal"?
p.p.p.s what has the way a frontman addresses the crowd at a gig got to do with being "metal'?

stop labeling everything and just enjoy the music for music's sake.

if you don't like the angle a band is taking, then stop going to their shows and stop buying their albums.
Afaceinthematrix
bjwok wrote:
Afaceinthematrix, it seems from your original post (and your follow ups) that the issue isn't really about metallica as a band anymore, it's more about how you conceive the band should act, what they should record, how they should style themselves and how they should curtail their creativity.


My issue with Metallica right now, in this post, is simple. They, in my opinion, ruined the Big Four Tour. The Big Four Tour was supposed to be a tour that celebrates all of their musical achievements. But by Metallica getting a full half hour more on their set, it is really becoming a "Metallica tour: feat. Slayer, Megadeth, and Anthrax as supporting acts." Metallica became a headlining band while the rest are just supporting acts and that undermines their accomplishments.

Quote:
you've mentioned a few times about being "metal" and some of the antics of metallica on and off-stage are not "metal" (your wording) anymore.

i'd argue that trying to be something, trying to fit into some kind of preconceived notion of conformity, whatever form it may take is your real issue.


You're right in that you don't try to "be anything" in order to be metal. However, Metallica is trying to be something. Have you seen them? From their shows, it is obvious that they're trying to be a family friendly big huge, fancy, rock band. Seriously... They are terrible. "*to a kid in the front row*Hi. Look how close we are! How old are you? 11? 12? I'm 46!" - James Hetfield... Or even worse, "Anaheim, you make us feel good. We're here to make you feel good!" Or even worse "Now we're one big, happy Metallica family." Metal is also about what you aren't.

Quote:
i'm sure when metallica started jamming as a bunch of mates back in the day they just did what they felt came naturally to them (just like any other band - no matter the genre: be it pop, grunge, industrial whatever). they didn't sit down and work out what would make them more "metal", they just play the music they wanted to play.


Yeah, but they also had Cliff Burton and Dave Mustaine writing "back in the day."

Quote:
the trouble is, people like yourself get upset when the bands ideas and goals differ from what you had planned for them. of course they are going to sign to a label if and when they are offered. you think these guys want to work day jobs when clearly their passion and talent was music?


I didn't have any plans set out for them. They can have their own ideas and goals, of course. But if those ideas and goals are making music that will sell the most then they're selling out....

Quote:
when did success become selling out?


It became selling out when you're more concerned about making money than about making great music...

Quote:
and for the record, i completely agree with you that ride the lighting, master of puppets and justice for all are the only decent metallica albums. the albums that followed were utter rubbish. as if load wasn't bad enough, they then give us re-load? goodness me...


Kill 'Em All was also good...

Quote:
the difference with me and you is that i'm happy to watch from a distance as they take their downward spiral. realistically it doesn't make a difference in anyway to my life. i'll still whack on justice and crank it to 10 from time to time.


Most of the time I will do that too... I brought them us because I was furious at them for ruining what should have been a "Big Four Tour." I honestly don't think that it is a "Big Four Tour" anymore because how could it be? It's a Metallica tour with the rest as opening acts and that undermines the other band's accomplishments (which many have been greater... Peace Sells... But Who's Buying?, Rust In Peace, Endgame, Reign In Blood, South of Heaven, Seasons in the Abyss, and God Hates Us All are better than Metallica...)

Quote:
as for the big four tour i do agree with you that the time slots should be equal, however if your distaste for metallica is that strong the solution is pretty simple: leave before their set.


That isn't the point... I wouldn't totally object to seeing them again... Last time I saw them they played For Whom the Bell Tolls, Trapped Under Ice, and The Shortest Straw, so they may play something good again. I've also heard Fade to Black so if they could play Fight Fire with Fire, Creeping Death, and Ride the Lightning, I will basically have heard their entire best album...

Quote:
p.s. what has a haircut got to do with being "metal"?

It's just symbolic... I count the major spiral down with Load (The Black Album was definitely the start, but Load was like a cliff jump). And then they cut their hair with that album so I sort of just think it's symbolic...
Quote:
p.p.s. what has the way fans act in a mosh got to do with being "metal"?

Fans react to the music. Coming from someone who has seen hundreds of shows, the better and more brutal the metal, the more brutal the pits...
Quote:
p.p.p.s what has the way a frontman addresses the crowd at a gig got to do with being "metal'?

There are some things you just don't do that don't represent what metal stands for... And James Hetfield fails to understand that... He used to know that back in the day when he'd come out drunk and cuss out the audience...

Quote:
stop labeling everything and just enjoy the music for music's sake.

Labels are how you identify people.
Quote:

if you don't like the angle a band is taking, then stop going to their shows and stop buying their albums.

I did... Quite some time ago, actually. I did go to a Metallica show last year but that was mainly just to check out what they've become... And that's when I saw what they'd really become...
liljp617
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
bjwok wrote:
Afaceinthematrix, it seems from your original post (and your follow ups) that the issue isn't really about metallica as a band anymore, it's more about how you conceive the band should act, what they should record, how they should style themselves and how they should curtail their creativity.


My issue with Metallica right now, in this post, is simple. They, in my opinion, ruined the Big Four Tour. The Big Four Tour was supposed to be a tour that celebrates all of their musical achievements. But by Metallica getting a full half hour more on their set, it is really becoming a "Metallica tour: feat. Slayer, Megadeth, and Anthrax as supporting acts." Metallica became a headlining band while the rest are just supporting acts and that undermines their accomplishments.


I really would agree with you if anybody from the other three bands had spoken out about it (maybe they have and I haven't seen it). So far, I've seen Dave Mustaine praise how great the Big Four Tour has turned out to be and Dave Ellefson giving huge props to Metallica:

Dave Ellefson wrote:
"I’ve always got along well with them. I was never in Metallica so I like them. I think they’re great. I’ve always liked them as guys, I thought they were cool, their band rocks, their records are great. They’re just a ferocious live band.

"As far as the obvious with our whole band and all the bands, honestly, it’s great. Metallica have risen to such huge success, it’s very cool of them that they would move themselves off of their perch of iconic celebrity to just come back down to this scene of metal, which we’ve all created together. They’ve been able to move far away from this scene many years ago through the records they made and the songs that they wrote, which I always admired because most bands can’t.

"All four of us have a very different sound even though we all came out of the same gene pool musically and to some degree we all kind of end up as a branch off the Metallica family tree. I mean Dave was in Metallica, I played with Dave, Kerry King played with Megadeth. We’re all part of the Metallica fist in some shape or form. It’s cool. It’s sort of like a family reunion, which is very healthy and a lot of fun."


Those are two of the three people I would expect to say something if they really felt it (third being KK). If they don't have a problem with how things have played out, I can't see any reason I should.
slashnburn99
its all politics, money and egos.

Metallica sells bums on seats now to broad range of people, megadeath not so much.

Watch Metallica and get the other 3 bands free

I learned to play guitar playing the black album, which i love, however older fans feel let down by this and St Anger the therapy sessions really ruined that for me

I`ve seen them live and they were really good. but not worldclass

The best band i`ve seen live are Green Day, i`m not a huge fan of them but they were outstanding
Klaw 2
hmm I like most metallica albums but I like almost anything from mozart to frigging slipknot (only their "softer songs", most of their last album).

However you can clearly hear the different between their first and last albums. And i do like the older ones better. St anger was a bad album even for me, the drum that sounds hollow especially.
Their last album was better I especially like unforgiven 3 but i have to admit that this is kinda soft compared to their first albums.
liljp617
Of course it's softer. People change between the ages of 18 and 40. The problem people have with Metallica is that they're human beings, they're individuals. They seem to be one of the few bands that gets this treatment...I find it somewhat odd.

slashnburn99 wrote:
its all politics, money and egos.


What is politics? They've all pretty much come to terms with each other, perhaps with the exception of Hammett and KK, which I don't really keep up with.

Money? None of these bands need money. If all they were after was money they could have quit ages ago. They also wouldn't carry on with a show in the immediate aftermath of earthquakes (as Metallica recently did).

Egos? Probably so. A big ego is arguably a requisite to reach the point all these bands have, specifically Megadeth and Metallica.
c'tair
I wouldn't agree with you on them selling out. I'm a huge Metallica fan, I heard their first songs when I was 12 or so and I still listen to them eight years later. However I will agree with you that there is a huge difference between their first 3-4 albums and their later albums. I listen to the first three quite often, but I only nitpick a few good songs from the later albums, because the whole albums aren't as great as Ride the Lightening or Master of Puppets.
The only later albums I really like listening to are S&M and Death Magnetic. DM seems much more closed to their roots than albums like St.Anger, Load or ReLoad.

Oh also, I highly recommend some of their concert albums like Live Sh.it, Bing and Purge (3CDs from 1993, very nicely played and mastered).

I really pity myself because I can't catch the Big Four on tour. Any idea if they will be performing in the US, east coast?
Afaceinthematrix
I have watched the Binge and Purge DVD. It is a good live show. That was probably around the end of them being good live. But they still weren't that great. Many people who seem to think that that is the greatest show of all time probably haven't seen too many other metal bands because that Metallica is good, but still not nearly as good live as many other bands that I have seen. I have literally seen hundreds (I don't keep track, but it is somewhere in the three figures) of metal bands live. Without any effort at all, I can list better live bands:

Blackguard (best live band ever imo)
Behemoth
Slayer
Children of Bodom
Skeletonwitch
Amon Amarth
Iron Maiden
Etc...

Metallica live now is just pathetic and painful to watch - even for a "metalivirgin."

P.S. Oh, and I am pretty sure that Binge and Purge is not from 1993. I think it was from 1989 because I am pretty sure that the DVD that I watched from it was titled something like "Seattle 1989." And I also do not recall anything played from the Black Album. Plus, in the background, there was the lady liberty which implies that it was the Justice tour...
sandmanxyz
Afaceinthematrix wrote:


P.S. Oh, and I am pretty sure that Binge and Purge is not from 1993. I think it was from 1989 because I am pretty sure that the DVD that I watched from it was titled something like "Seattle 1989." And I also do not recall anything played from the Black Album. Plus, in the background, there was the lady liberty which implies that it was the Justice tour...


Yeah, you're completely right about that one. And I also agree that Metallica live show is not special anymore. But they try (they're not youngsters anymore) and I give them credit for that. When they were in his prime they put on some great shows, but everything that is good comes to an end.

But to add something to your list I would remember Pantera's shows, like the Monsters Of Rock-Moscow 91'. Hell of a show!!!
c'tair
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
I have watched the Binge and Purge DVD. It is a good live show. That was probably around the end of them being good live. But they still weren't that great. Many people who seem to think that that is the greatest show of all time probably haven't seen too many other metal bands because that Metallica is good, but still not nearly as good live as many other bands that I have seen. I have literally seen hundreds (I don't keep track, but it is somewhere in the three figures) of metal bands live. Without any effort at all, I can list better live bands:

Blackguard (best live band ever imo)
Behemoth
Slayer
Children of Bodom
Skeletonwitch
Amon Amarth
Iron Maiden
Etc...

Metallica live now is just pathetic and painful to watch - even for a "metalivirgin."

P.S. Oh, and I am pretty sure that Binge and Purge is not from 1993. I think it was from 1989 because I am pretty sure that the DVD that I watched from it was titled something like "Seattle 1989." And I also do not recall anything played from the Black Album. Plus, in the background, there was the lady liberty which implies that it was the Justice tour...


Well, I haven't seen as many shows as you did honestly, so I can't put up a comparison as detailed as you did. I need a couple more years time and about a hundred more shows to do that Smile . I'd also need to actually see Metallica live because god damn, they've been eluding me for years now, last year was the most shocking way - They played in NYC last year and then they played in Poland in the summer time this year. BOTH times I was in the other country Shocked . Like literally, a couple days more or less in the US or Poland and I would've went to their concert but no, they run away from or something. And honestly, I haven't seen any concert DVDs, so I have to look into that.

Also, the Live Shit, Binge and Purge 3CD album I have comes from Mexico City, I'd have to check their tour dates and see if it corresponds.
Thanks man for the info.
Afaceinthematrix
An update on the big four tour...



A lot of people are, understandably very irritated at the fact that there is just one U.S. date while there were several European dates. However, I am not too worried about this because I am sure they will add more dates. Tours usually start off with a few dates and add more later.

What I am mad at is the fact that they are charging $100 for the show! WTF? Who can afford that? That is completely unmetal (especially when I go to shows all the time and usually only pay $15-$20). Also, it doesn't surprise me because that is the price of a typical Metallica show (wheras I paid $20 for a Slayer show once and another time I paid $45 for a Slayer, Megadeth, and Testament (so basically the big three since Testament has done more for thrash than Anthrax) pit ticket and the cheap tickets for that show were only $10 - one tenth of the price)!

So again, they are turning this completely nonmetal (which isn't supposed to be about money), putting Metallica in the spotlight (they just have to be at the top of the flier - just like the European ones), and turning it into a Metallica show with the others as supporting acts...

I don't think I'll go to the show simply because I cannot afford it... But, since it's all about money, I'll post a picture that just fits:



Nice... Beach shorts, flip flops, and an Armani bag (yes, I know, I'm being annoying because I'm a metal purest and believe that you shouldn't be in the music for the money)...
liljp617
I understand the frustration and reasoning, but it seems you're going on about the ticket price based on pretty much nothing but assumptions. If the other three bands were vehemently opposed to the ticket price, don't you think they would speak up about it -- at least in the meetings presumably had when planning the tour? Seems they're okay with a high ticket price for these shows. Unless there has been some sort of press release where the ticket price is explained and reasons are given similar to what you've said here, it seems like a leap (and cliche) to toss the blame solely on Metallica, one of four bands involved with the tour.

In any case, this whole tour idea is a ploy for money from all four of the bands. They recognized the non-stop desire of fans to see these four bands on stage together, and they're cashing in. It would be naive to think the other three bands aren't seeing a fair chunk of the profit from this tour.
Afaceinthematrix
liljp617 wrote:
I understand the frustration and reasoning, but it seems you're going on about the ticket price based on pretty much nothing but assumptions. If the other three bands were vehemently opposed to the ticket price, don't you think they would speak up about it -- at least in the meetings presumably had when planning the tour? Seems they're okay with a high ticket price for these shows. Unless there has been some sort of press release where the ticket price is explained and reasons are given similar to what you've said here, it seems like a leap (and cliche) to toss the blame solely on Metallica, one of four bands involved with the tour.

In any case, this whole tour idea is a ploy for money from all four of the bands. They recognized the non-stop desire of fans to see these four bands on stage together, and they're cashing in. It would be naive to think the other three bands aren't seeing a fair chunk of the profit from this tour.


Yeah of course. I did put a lot of blame on Metallica here. I realized that when I reread my post. It hasn't been like that everywhere. I just had a text message conversation with my friend where I said I was a little disgusted with the four of them. So I do recognize that they're all just grabbing cash and making something which almost any metal fan would love to see unaffordable to most. Although, I do feel like Metallica has more blame than the rest because $100 is the price of a Metallica show whereas the last time I saw Slayer and Megadeth together they had cheap $10 seats and I think I only paid $45 for the pit tickets...

And really, I don't care if there are $100 tickets. This will attract a lot of people and so it has to be competitive in who gets into the pit. What I am mostly annoyed about is that every ticket is $100 and then it's all general admission for a huge show. Yeah it's cool if you're at the front, but what about the person way in the back that paid the same price? I hope they're either big and can shove their way up or they like to crowd surf because that's the only way to get up...

In my opinion, what they should have done, is chosen basically the same venues that they do Ozzfests in. That way they can have $100 tickets for people who can afford it and want to be in the pit and then $20 lawn tickets for everyone else. Hell, that's what Maiden did when I saw them last June. I couldn't afford the $90 or so that it was to be in the pit. So I simply forked over a reasonable $20 and was able to see the show way back on the lawn... And so was everyone else who doesn't go and bring home 6 figures a year...

So yeah I'm annoyed at all of them (just like I was annoyed when none of them spoke up against Metallica taking more time for their set than the rest which undermines the other bands' accomplishments). It just isn't Metallica... I'm just assuming they initiated it. Metal isn't supposed to be about money... And given that "As of August 2010 the album [Death Magnetic] has sold more than 6.5 million copies worldwide" (including MYSELF - so yeah, I bitch about Metallica but will still buy their albums if I like it), "World Painted Blood sold 41,000 copies in the United States in its first week" (again, including myself), and "A week after its release, the album [Endgame] had sold 45,000 copies in the United States and 8,200 copies in Canada" (again, including myself) then the bands obviously have a lot of fans who have spent a lot of money on them... So the least they could do is not rip them off and give them an affordable show...

It's also a money ploy on how there's only "one U.S. show..." This will draw people in from all over the U.S. and get extra money. Then when they announce the real U.S. tour and they go to those peoples' hometowns, they'll probably pay to see them again... I would if it wasn't $100...
c'tair
Damn man, now I feel the frustration. 100$ for a ticket is waaaaaaaaaaay too much. I paid 25$ for a ticket for Arch Enemy last year and now I paid another 25$ (+ about 20$ for handling fees, jerks) for an Amon Amarth concert this May. Then I started looking for other bands and lo and behold, Metallica is playing in sunny California for an outrageous ticket price, not even counting the cost of the ticket I'd have to pay for to actually get there. Sorry, can't afford it but I do hope your predictions come true and that Metallica will tour the rest of the US later this year or next.
rocking
Metallica is the biggest one out of the four.
And the album St. Anger is my favourite album of their albums,
They didn't make this album because the wanted to make a lot of money,
They did it because they wanted to create something new,
Easily the could make a lot of thrash metal / heavy metal albums and sell a lot of milions of albums.
But the didn't do it, until the newest album....
sandmanxyz
rocking wrote:
Metallica is the biggest one out of the four.
And the album St. Anger is my favourite album of their albums,
They didn't make this album because the wanted to make a lot of money,
They did it because they wanted to create something new,
Easily the could make a lot of thrash metal / heavy metal albums and sell a lot of milions of albums.
But the didn't do it, until the newest album....


Yeah, whatever you said, mate. Wink
portoskt
what do you think, why metal music is still so popular?
foumy6
I hate metallica I would go to anyshows on the big four tour if either Metallica wasnt there or they replaced them with a better band like Judas Priest or something!
tingkagol
I haven't seen many Metallica shows, and if I did, it's probably on a DVD or something. At those times that I did 'see' them perform, they're not at all magnificent - and if I had to put the blame on someone for their subpar performances, I'd point my finger to Lars Ulrich. That guy's drumming is just RIDICULOUSLY amateur. It's not even funny. I honestly think I could murder that guy in a drum-off, and I'm not even an advanced drummer.
jasonapache64
I agree that every band on the Big Four tour should take turns headlining. I like metallica and megadeth. Like it has already been stated before. They are all in it for the money. In my opinion Slayer sucks. They have some real good riffs, but it seems that they take a good riff, reel you in with it and then they ****** it all up. Just like Raining Blood, Starts off real sick, then it goes to start up garbage. Anthrax has always sucked. Scott Ian is only good at making Metal Documentaries and all Anthrax is doing is riding the temporary Metal wave that the Big Four buzz has created. Lay off of old metal bands man. Metallica and Megadeth have to be in their mid-40's. As I stated earlier about Slayer, well Metallica does it too. So does Megadeth, Slayer sucks, I would not want to see them in concert, Anthrax sucks too. There aren't any real good metal bands anymore, unfortunately we are left with these bands that are made up of old guys. Trivium is ok I guess. I am not really into the underground metal. If you are going to complain about metallica, complain about how hetfield doesn't sing with the same aggression as he used to around the Justice/Black album days. Who cares if they cut their hair.
pazis
Yes. I agree 100%. Metallica was good and is not any more. There are many many bands much better than Metallica. I would never go to any of their concerts. There are many better and actually cheaper torus! Very Happy
_AVG_
Metallica were at their zenith during Ride the Lightning, Master of Puppets, etc. The late 80s were the best for them. They created masterpieces like Fade to Black and Master of Puppets, but then unfortunately, Load, Reload and St. Anger were pretty sad (very disappointing indeed!) ... ever since, they did a fair job in Death Magnetic (with The Day that Never Comes at least worth listening to). But they still couldn't return to their best ... I don't think they will be able to return to their original awesome selves.
Blummer
They should record something together, these 4 bands. Lulu's a complete disaster for me. Can't see any reason why these 4 can't make a collaboration in a form of a studio album.
Related topics
Which sports you like?
The unforgiven- METALLICA
Favorite metal bands
Whats the latest gig (concert) you went to?
Thrash Metal
Whos The Best Drummer?
Hard Rock and Metal... The Genre With the Most Endurance...
Do you think your ugly?? Not like the models?? Check this
BCS Title Game: OHIO STATE vs. FLORIDA
Metallica Down the Ages (Wats Yur Fav Metallica Song)
Slayer and Manson
MEGADETH - Endgame!
Megadeth @ the Thebby
heavy metal and Caucasians
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Sports and Entertainment -> Music

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.