Metal Reviews

The one band that EVERY metalhead listens to.


WHO???

tbh I've listened to the two metallica albums like twice since I downloaded them.


That's because classic albums are generally a matter of hindsight, OK Computer didn't even break the top 20 for the US

We had another Metallica, Pantera!

both band's had the same lifespan of amazing albums, pantera just came around ten years afterwards with thiers.

So i would say the question is "who's the next Pantera!"

Yeah, but Pantera never came close to matching Metallica's commercial success, which Is what I'm talking about when I say "the next Metallica"

Hey, I'm not saying bands can't be big and famous, but I just can't see a band being as big as some bands were in the 80s and 90s. I just can't. It was a different time, man, and if you wanted to see a band live, you bought a ticket to a show; if you wanted to hear an album, you had to buy a CD. Now you can see live stuff online and download music for free. That'll be sufficient for far too many people.

Precisely. Which means they haven't been hitting those high spots in the charts long/consistently enough. Don't ask me how long is long enough. Not sure. But, Metallica's next album, will definitely top charts all across the globe. St. Anger sold 3 million copies world wide and was considered a mediocre album (with respect to being a hit or not). A figure which would prove to be a huge hit had it been some other band. I also think the timing of both Metallica's formation and their releases also had a lot to do with them making it as the biggest metal band in the world today.

Opinions of Metallica have become so personal, though, that nowadays a Metallica album isn't even judged so much by its actual quality as it's judged more by the individual reviewer's opinion of the band. St. Anger, despite how mediocre it turned out, still earned rave reviews from several mainstream publications. Not so much because it was a good album, but more because these people felt they HAD to give it high ratings considering how hyped up it was. Similarly, there were many people who gave St. Anger low ratings, not so much because of how bad it was, but more because they lost so much respect for Metallica during the 90's that they weren't willing to give ANYTHING they made thereafter a chance.

lol ken sounds just like one of those people saying the 70s were the best time for music. old good new bad~~!!! XD

If we measure band size in terms of ability to pack arenas, though, presumably downloading will make it more likely that we'll see huge metal artists in future.

Your brain is too feeble to even begin to understand what I was just saying. Nowhere did I say any other era of music was better.

Exactly. HIM, Machine Head and Mastodon opening for Metallica at Wembley is only going to get them fans! Metal is more mainstream than ever, hell, I'd say the current state of affairs is pretty good.

And Ken, Metal may have had more recognition in the 80s (I was not born/very young at the time, so I'll happily take your word for it) but you can't say what was popular was as heavy as what is now. Now, we're getting Extreme Metal in the limelight, Gorgoroth in The Guardian, Enslaved in the New York Times, plenty of bands getting recognition. You know I agree with you about downloading but you can't deny that there's a section of the public that wouldn't be into Metal were it not for the internet.

Edit: wanted to end on a more on-topic note: there will be big metal bands in the future, why the hell not? You're all so pessimistic and elitist about it...

Edit: 14000. Yee hah, as the cowboys shriek.

Yeah my brain turned off when I read that seeing live stuff online was comparable to seeing a band live.

I second Dago's pick. If there's one band that deserves to be as big as Metallica in terms of musicianship and quality, it's Nile. Although their decision to play at the Ozzfest was regarded as crap, it was a good way for them to broaden their fanbase. Just like Mastodon and Machinehead opened for Metallica.

At the moment, the only way for a band to be really commercially big is to have the media covering a new/fresh genre. Back then it was all about the thrash and Metallica hit it off at the perfect time. Somebody here did mention that they came in at the right time and I totally agree with it. IMO Metallica were the elite of 'The Four Horsemen' of thrash, or the whole genre for that matter because they their lyrics were one of the most intelectually intelligent ones. No offense to the Slaytanic hooligans, you have to admit Metallica DO have the best lyrics compared to the other bands of their time. The music they wrote were also beautiful and clicked well with the lyrics. Suffice to say Metallica were THE perfect band.

Using the theories of physics and chemistry (I'm pretending to be smart here), the resurrection of Headbangers Ball and the rise of metalcore is the perfect mixture to give you the next biggest band.

Oh, another reason no other band would emulate Metallica is the fact that Metallica won fans on both sides, the hunks and the pussies. At the moment I see the LOG fanbase more male dominant while Trivium is gettin more pussy than anyone else.

no I don't think so... I don't belive that any metal band will be as big as metallica

Sure there will. There will be a lot of bands as big as Metallica, in fact, and some much bigger. Don't judge this phenomenon as being so limited in time. Metal has only been around for 30 years. Not even a human lifetime. In the next 100, 200 or 300 years bigger bands will appear, singing for bigger audiences, as the world grows (not only for Earth audiences, but for our colonies on other planets and space stations - I know I'm going Startrek here, but colonization of other worlds is unavoidable). The only question is if metal will be still around a few hundred or thousand years from now. I think it will, though in mutated forms. And if it will, it's sure to spawn bigger bands. The only way Metallica will remain the biggest band ever is if metal dies in the very near future, or if Earth does.

Honestly, for metal to really have any chance of staying alive for that long, we need some more bands breaking into the mainstream. To help breed a new generation of fans and show the world that metal is still alive. Let's face it. Most of us probably would not be listening to metal today if it didn't have the mainstream breakthrough it had in the 80's and early-90's. Of course, we now have a new generation of youngsters growing up. And metal is only now starting to come back to the mainstream. But suppose it just drops out of maimstream consciousness altogether. Chances are, future generations will either be unaware that it exists or just see it as some goofy "has-been" fad. And the metal audience will be limited to only a select few people.

Yep, metal fans can piss and moan all they want about bands "selling out" and "going mainstream." But, whether they may like it or not, mainstream exposure is a big part of what keeps metal alive in the first place.

I think there are more choices/alternatives now, and although the internet makes a given music more accessible, you can't forget that it makes all music more accessible. For every person who's interested in metal because of the internet, there are others that are into classical, IDM, jungle, and more underground acts of popular genres. ... And don't forget that the internet makes it easier to influence/manipulate decisions and attitudes about music too.

And I have to wonder how many people really focus on any one style of music or band anymore. Sure, most people might have a favorite band, but if a lot of people favor that band, I think maybe there's a tendency to gloss it over and focus on other bands instead. "Diversity" is in, and I think that extends into music tastes as well, and I think people often like to jump on something "different" so that they can feel different, they think it's cool, etc. Frankly, I think there would be a lot more backlash now against a band that starts to get really big thereby preventing it from ever getting that big in the first place. And perhaps that's particularly true of metal or any other already existing genre, but I guess I don't really know. I won't say that no band/musician can ever come along and be as big as Metallica, because one can, but I think it's becoming harder and harder. The validity of anything that is (exists) and is hyped almost purely through marketing ploys and over-saturation has to be questioned anyway, though, and, not to reroute this into a Metallica discussion, but I question their artistic relevance as well.

Really, there's too much of a throw away attitude in place right now to really allow for anything to grow and actually sustain, I think. But then again, I'm not 15 anymore either and I guess it's hard for me to speculate on what goes on there and how it will impact music in the future (but I'll admit that I'm not optimistic).

Well, Pantera sold around 4 million albums per album, metallica sold about 10 million, almost no one can do that except Van Halen and Metallica, not even AC/DC maintained 10 million per album, they had a couple that did it.

It's an extrordinary feat that is probaby not going to happen again, ever then if 10 million is the benchmark. Especially with metal being so diversified that metal fans rarely come to a consensus as to an album that is really great.

My point is that most of us own pantera records. I can't imagine everyone owningsoemthing new that comes out onless it is really a huge attempt to crossover every genre wqith amazing results, this doesn't seem possible.

Man 100,200 or 300 years? Do you even think well last that long?

Wait...you think everyone goes to a concert for the live experience? Pffft! Keep dreaming.