- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Help settle a debate: Metallica's Black Album vs. AC/DC's "Back in Black"
Posted on 3/25/16 at 8:28 pm to LSU alum wannabe
Posted on 3/25/16 at 8:28 pm to LSU alum wannabe
Back In Black, and it's not even a contest. Metallica's 'Black' album is horrid. A sorry excuse for songwriting and lousy chord progressions all wrapped up in one. Out of twelve songs maybe two are halfway decent.
1
Posted on 3/26/16 at 9:27 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
not saying you are that fan,
I'm not. I was never a huge Metallica fan, and I don't dislike the Black album. Just giving some perspective from some of my friends that were huge Metallica fans.
And the meme just makes me laugh. I'm sure a similar one could be made about me if you contrasted my "image" today against my "image" when I was 20, and I'd still laugh. Sorry it touched a nerve.
Posted on 3/26/16 at 10:59 am to Sayre
quote:
'Black' album is horrid. A sorry excuse for songwriting and lousy chord progressions all wrapped up in one. Out of twelve songs maybe two are halfway decent.
What a ridiculous take.
Posted on 3/26/16 at 11:35 am to LoneStarTiger
Shen they become popular they are selling out! Stupid arguement
Posted on 3/27/16 at 8:11 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Big Scrub TX
quote:
What a ridiculous take.
After what you said about AC/DC, your opinion on anything music related is utterly meaningless.
Bon Scott era AC/DC is some of the best pure rock n' roll ever recorded.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 9:14 am to The Spleen
quote:
Sorry it touched a nerve.
Touching a nerve is a strong phrase. I'm not a big Metallica fan. I appreciated their music but was never really a Metal-Head.
I've just grown weary of the sell-out argument.
Get old= sell out.
Get rich= sell out.
Get sober= sell out.
Realize your best work has been written but still put out music= sell out. The fact that some of their newer stuff is not going to be Ride The Lightning or Master of Puppets is not selling out. They've had a 30 year career. Rare is the artist who can continue to write quality material til the end. And if they do it is going to be a song off of an album, never again an entire album masterpiece.
Bottom line. Getting old sucks. On many levels. But it does have its perks too.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 12:55 pm to Sayre
quote:
Bon Scott era AC/DC is some of the best pure rock n' roll ever recorded
Well, thread was about BiB and I was mainly commenting on the Brian Johnson era...although it's not as if the drumming was ripping on the Bon Scott tunes.
I allowed that there are 4-5 alltime classics by AC/DC. But a lot of their albums are the definition of filler tracks with no substance and with boring instrumentation.
I'm not sure there's a single Metallica track ever that fits that bill.
Again, the supposed "filler" on the Black Album is tunes like My Friend of Misery, which is absurd.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 2:23 pm to BilJ
quote:
Metallica's Black Album vs. AC/DC's "Back in Black"
In terms of what?
Metallica is a better written album with more overall variety. It is also supposedly the best-sounding analog album ever released.
However, as a pure hard rock album Back in Black is the epitome of perfection. It is a party album. It is a rockin' album. It is hard and heavy, down and dirty.
It is the ultimate comeback record. AC/DC was considered good as gone after Bon passed away. No other band could lose such a pivotal member of their band, such a legendary frontman and presence, and then proceed to immediately turn around a release one of the five-highest selling records in music history.
This post was edited on 3/27/16 at 3:23 pm
Posted on 3/27/16 at 2:29 pm to BilJ
My opinion is Back in Black is better because it was more of a landmark album. Johnson was new and no one had ever heard anything like it. It was new and fresh at the time. Even for Bon Scott fans.
Metallica's Black was a great album but other than putting more harmonies in to expand their audience, it wasn't that much different than And Justice. It was still Metallica only "lite".
Both albums were so over played ( by me also) that I never was interested in anything they did after. Just my opinion.
Metallica's Black was a great album but other than putting more harmonies in to expand their audience, it wasn't that much different than And Justice. It was still Metallica only "lite".
Both albums were so over played ( by me also) that I never was interested in anything they did after. Just my opinion.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 3:02 pm to saint amant steve
Good perspective. And no matter how one spins it, Metallica absolutely sold out on the Black album. Although I learned to like some of it, Enter Sandman is the equivalent of Def Leppards, Pour some sugar on me. Just garbage imo and was the same when DL sold out.
But they pay their bills by putting out crap en masse. Cant really blame them for making bank but it doesnt change what happened either.
Back in Black is raw, unadulterated rock. Pure in all forms. Lyrics and over-analyzing structure is not what most rock is about. Its about frick you balls out raw feeling. AC/DC is proof of that. Metallica once was that.
Back in black wins this battle by a lot.
But they pay their bills by putting out crap en masse. Cant really blame them for making bank but it doesnt change what happened either.
Back in Black is raw, unadulterated rock. Pure in all forms. Lyrics and over-analyzing structure is not what most rock is about. Its about frick you balls out raw feeling. AC/DC is proof of that. Metallica once was that.
Back in black wins this battle by a lot.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 3:21 pm to grape nutz
There are better debates to be had concerning two albums being compared.
Just look at what the debate turned into on this forum.
Just look at what the debate turned into on this forum.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 4:46 pm to PiscesTiger
I was reading a Master Of Puppets retrospective on Loudwire recently and even Kurt said the Black album probably wouldn't have happened if Cliff hadn't died and had still been an influence on the band.
Bob Rock took an great band and led them willing to Shitsville.
Bob Rock took an great band and led them willing to Shitsville.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 4:47 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Big Scrub TX
quote:
I allowed that there are 4-5 alltime classics by AC/DC. But a lot of their albums are the definition of filler tracks with no substance and with boring instrumentation.
I'm not sure there's a single Metallica track ever that fits that bill.
You have a tin ear. No wonder you like hair metal.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 6:09 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
I allowed that there are 4-5 alltime classics by AC/DC. But a lot of their albums are the definition of filler tracks with no substance and with boring instrumentation.
I'm not sure there's a single Metallica track ever that fits that bill.
Well, to be fair Metallica hasn't released nearly as much material as AC/DC.
AC/DC released 14 consecutive studio LPs which reached platinum status in the U.S. All 15 of their studio albums have been certified gold. To my knowledge, they are the only group to record a gold-certified record in five separate decades ('70s, '80s, '90s, '00s, and '10s).
It's impossible to release that much material while maintaining high quality throughout. AC/DC could be labeled as a one trick pony, but they are the best at what they do and no band has ever managed to crank out so much music around the structure of a single power chord.
And please spare me with this idea that Metallica has never released any filler material. Are you telling me that during their last four releases you can't find a handful of filler tracks? I love Metallica, but even I can't drink that much Kool-Aid.
Posted on 3/27/16 at 6:50 pm to LSU alum wannabe
Selling out = growing up
Posted on 3/28/16 at 8:12 am to BilJ
I would give AC/DC the slight edge on this one.
Posted on 3/28/16 at 12:32 pm to Sayre
quote:
You have a tin ear. No wonder you like hair metal.
My ear is just fine.
Posted on 3/28/16 at 12:58 pm to saint amant steve
quote:
Well, to be fair Metallica hasn't released nearly as much material as AC/DC.
That's true. AC/DC have the benefit of a decade+ head start.
quote:
It's impossible to release that much material while maintaining high quality throughout. AC/DC could be labeled as a one trick pony, but they are the best at what they do and no band has ever managed to crank out so much music around the structure of a single power chord.
I'm not taking anything away from their ability to sell their craft to the masses.
quote:
And please spare me with this idea that Metallica has never released any filler material. Are you telling me that during their last four releases you can't find a handful of filler tracks? I love Metallica, but even I can't drink that much Kool-Aid.
It depends on how you define "filler". I always took it to mean the record company knew there were a few hits and so urged a band to just slap some other shite together to "fill out" the rest of the album for the simple reason that LPs can be sold for 5X the price of a single. By that definition, no, Metallica has never had any filler.
I mean, their songwriting and recording process itself doesn't lend itself to this approach. e.g. I believe Death Magnetic was honed to 10 songs from 20 candidates. AFTER Death Magnetic came out, they released an EP called Beyond Magnetic which had 4 of the other 10 songs that didn't make the cut. IMO, that is the EXACT OPPOSITE of including filler in an album.
I've read that the current album has 30 candidate tracks, which I assume will also be winnowed down to 8-12 total.
Contrast this with, say, GnR who put out 2 Illusion albums, infamously including the worst filler song of all time - My World.
Specifically to your challenge - the last 4 studio albums are - Death Magnetic, St. Anger, Reload and Load. The only album that has a song that I don't like a lot is St. Anger - and that is more due to horrible production values (particularly of the drums). But that is actually the last album I think you could deride as filled with filler given it was such a clear change in mentality and direction - it was quite-literally the anti-Bob Rock.
mid-80's AC/DC is what I really object to. I offer as an example:
Sink the Pink
This is the most generic-sounding AC/DC song imaginable. While AC/DC were in the studio recording this masterpiece, Metallica were just hitting the road in support of Ride the Lightning - followed up, of course, by the recording of MoP. That's about as big of a gap in quality and seriousness as I can imagine between 2 big acts.
Posted on 3/28/16 at 1:45 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
The only album that has a song that I don't like a lot is St. Anger
Do you like anything on it?
I've tried to be honest - I didn't listen to Metallica until the very late 80s (Justice) - then went back and picked up Kill, Lightning and Puppets. I liked Load and Reload, for what they were, and wasn't really turned off by the maturing process of their sound (I guess because I caught them halfway - if I had been there from the beginning, yeah, it's pretty dramatic shift between Kill 'Em All and Reload).
But:
1. They should never have made that movie.
2. They should have hired a real drummer a long time ago and let Lars be their manager/songwriting collaborator
3. They should have discarded St. Anger and started from scratch - rehiring Mustaine in the process.
THAT would have been some kind of monster.
ETA:
4. They should never have killed Napster. I can't forgive them for that.
This post was edited on 3/28/16 at 1:46 pm
Posted on 3/28/16 at 2:04 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Do you like anything on it?
OH yeah. I love the title track as well as Some Kind of Monster. Sweet Amber is awesome also.
quote:
1. They should never have made that movie.
Sure, although I don't give a shite about that at all.
quote:
2. They should have hired a real drummer a long time ago and let Lars be their manager/songwriting collaborator
Nah.
quote:
3. They should have discarded St. Anger and started from scratch
I've accepted that they were just in a really terrible place personally at that point in time and the album lanced that boil for them. I don't begrudge it.
quote:
rehiring Mustaine in the process.
Oh, how I wish! quote:
4. They should never have killed Napster. I can't forgive them for that.
Meh. I think it's hard to make the argument that they killed Napster. I just want to make sure it's remembered properly: their objection to Napster was that an unfinished work of theirs (I Disappear) was stolen from the studio and then disseminated online. That is a very specific and very easy to sympathize with claim. Had they been, say, canvas artists and someone had stolen a painted work prior to completion, I believe that everyone would have had the painter's back and not thought it was greedy or untoward at all.
In any event, Death Magnetic was a modern masterpiece and I can't wait for the new album.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News