Dub-T-123 Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 I can't stand Metallica but I have to admit I dig this one song by them I think it's called "For Whom the Bell Tolls".
Dub-T-123 Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Actually nvm I just listened to that song again and I don't dig it. Maybe I was thinking of something else..
Kimbabig Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Actually nvm I just listened to that song again and I don't dig it. Maybe I was thinking of something else.. can you think of any lyrics?
Dub-T-123 Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Just the words for whom the bell tolls with some fast thrashy guitars none of that cheesy crap that I was hearing when I just youtubed it. Maybe I just like one part of it and forgot about the rest haha
Riffster Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 That is a great song and a great album, it sounds a bit dated now but when it came out it was mind blowing, to me, still is.
AlanH Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 This was one of Dave Mustaine's songs along with Mechanix (The Four Horsemen), Phantom Lord and Jump in the Fire. He told them not to use his songs when he was kicked out but they did anyway. Check out Mustaine's debut album Killing is My Business and Business is Good (KIMBABIG!) by Megadeth, whom he subsequently formed. The songs on that album are outstanding - especially Chosen Ones, Skull Beneath the Skin and Looking Down the Cross. They are phenomenal tracks, IMO.
Riffster Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Dave actually co-wrote those tracks, he had some of the riffs of some of the tracks most notably Mechanix and the tracks were rounded by James and Lars, Dave is credited in the album, if he owned the tracks in their entirety he could have sued, but he didn't. Frankly the Four Horsemen sounds much better than Mechanix to me,
AlanH Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Dave actually co-wrote those tracks, he had some of the riffs of some of the tracks most notably Mechanix and the tracks were rounded by James and Lars, Dave is credited in the album, if he owned the tracks in their entirety he could have sued, but he didn't. Frankly the Four Horsemen sounds much better than Mechanix to me, Sure, I know they were co-credited to Dave by Metallica but the fact that Dave saw them as 'his songs' says to me that James and Lars' input was in providing tweaks and/or arrangements and, in the case of the four horsemen, a completely new lyric. I've always wondered how musicians can prove they own intellectual property based simply on one word against another.
Riffster Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Actually James re-wrote all the lyrics and a lot of the arrangements, hence Dave is given credit as the third or last co-writer in the songs even on Four Horsemen which is the least changed song of all. I am sure Dave saw those songs as his and they are, partially, reason why he is given credit. There are too many myths about Dave out there, only one reality.
FirstMeasure Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Dave Mustain and Cliff Burton were the best parts of Metallica, without those guys they simply have no Balls! Kill 'em All and Ride the Lightening are definitely Metallicas best efforts, and Master of Puppets wasn't half bad. It was definitely Cliff Burton that gave them that Gnarley Bottom End that made them Heavy, as opposed to the thin, cardboard box, drum centered, pseudo-metal they came out with from Garage Days on. Lars is just not a very creative force, not the best helmsman for a metal band. IMO, IMHO, to my ears, from my perspective, as I see it, but that's just me...etc...etc...etc.
Riffster Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 I hear you, I too have my opinion. You can argue with success all you want. Like I said too many myths about Dave and there is the impossible-to-prove theory that if Cliff had not died the band would be (insert whatever made up thing you can think of here). To me it is better than Dave was kicked out because he formed Megadeth, I don't blame Metallica either, I would not have a Heroin or any other addict in my band no matter how much talent they have, Dave claims he wasn't given a chance, his 15 trips to rehab over a decade show that kicking him out was the right thing to do. Dave is a great guy and Megadeth is a great band, now Metallica and Megadeth even play together and hang out. Go figure.
FirstMeasure Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 I completely agree, Dave is better off without Metallica. Honestly, I really don't think it was his addictions that caused them to fire him (and I have no proof, just a hunch based on my own experiences with musicians on an MUCH smaller scale than Metallica), I think it was a control issue. A guy like Dave needs to have complete control over his music. He just doesn't like to share the direction, just ask Dave Ellefson. Metallica seems more like a collaborative band, judging by the "Behind the Scenes" footage I've seen of them working on new material. I think that dynamic had more to do with their friction more than addiction. I mean, the whole band were raging Alcoholics when they fired Dave for partying too much . Granted, I've never actually know a musician that was a heroin addict, but I have know more than my share of Alcoholic Musicians. I can only imagine a bunch of hungover drunks firing someone for incorrect partying habits So really, despite of press releases and decades of excuses, I think it boiled down to a control issue. It's really hard to work with a control freak when your a collaborative musician. And to touch on your comment about "It's hard to argue with success", riffster. I'd say their success is evidence that they lost their balls. I mean, look at the heaviest metal bands of the day like Slayer. Big commercial success eludes them because their too heavy. Now look at Anthrax, their first few albums were Heavy Speed Metal, but they didn't enjoy real Billboard success until they incorporated hip hop and more "Listenable" elements into their music.
Riffster Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 Metallica had success from the beginning, so no, it wasn't because they lost their balls. Hit the Lights ushered a movement, I was there and still am following. But hey, if you are not a fan, you're not a fan. To me Metallica has always shown more influence from the NWOBHM than any of the other thrash bands, I still hear that influence in them to this day, sure they had watered down albums in the 90's and Kirk Hammet got to much into SRV but no one else from the thrashers was shinning either. Slayer lyrics are overly satanic in general, they have a lot of melody, selected songs could easily played on the radio. Hey take Exodus, great band but their lyrics can be too much. Anthrax? I stopped listening when they become rappy. By the way, there is a difference between an alcoholic and driking a lot, and there is a huge difference between that and heroin and there is a reason Dave kicked himself for 20 years for getting thrown out of Metallica. His words, not mine. Hey, Lemmy, got kicked out of Hawkwind for using "the wrong kind of drugs" My issue is with myths, theories and distorted facts that abound not with the facts, If you are Thrash fan check my other thread about the book.
Kimbabig Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 Have any of you guys read Mustaine's autobiography? It's a great read. A1 Steak Sauce
AlanH Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 Have any of you guys read Mustaine's autobiography? It's a great read. A1 Steak Sauce I'm tempted to get that book. What does he say about the ownership of those songs in it?
FirstMeasure Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 Metallica had success from the beginning, so no, it wasn't because they lost their balls. Hit the Lights ushered a movement, I was there and still am following. But hey, if you are not a fan, you're not a fan. To me Metallica has always shown more influence from the NWOBHM than any of the other thrash bands, I still hear that influence in them to this day, sure they had watered down albums in the 90's and Kirk Hammet got to much into SRV but no one else from the thrashers was shinning either. Slayer lyrics are overly satanic in general, they have a lot of melody, selected songs could easily played on the radio. Hey take Exodus, great band but their lyrics can be too much. Anthrax? I stopped listening when they become rappy. By the way, there is a difference between an alcoholic and driking a lot, and there is a huge difference between that and heroin and there is a reason Dave kicked himself for 20 years for getting thrown out of Metallica. His words, not mine. Hey, Lemmy, got kicked out of Hawkwind for using "the wrong kind of drugs" My issue is with myths, theories and distorted facts that abound not with the facts, If you are Thrash fan check my other thread about the book. Sure they were successful before "...And Justice For All", but it was the Video for "One" that got them headlining huge arena shows. That was shortly after they said they'd never have a video on MTV. I'm sure they were drunk when they said it, but that's what happened.
Riffster Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 I disagree, they were headlining some arena shows before then and there is footage to prove it. Just watch Cliff'em All. By the same logic Megadeth is a very commercial band as well, doesn't mean their music doesn't have balls. (By the way by the time Metallica released One as their first video Megadeth had 5 videos, including the covers Anarchy in the UK and No More Mister Nice Guy) Listen, if you don't like Metallica that's fine but if you want to discuss at least get your facts straight.
FirstMeasure Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 I disagree, they were headlining some arena shows before then and there is footage to prove it. Just watch Cliff'em All. By the same logic Megadeth is a very commercial band as well, doesn't mean their music doesn't have balls. (By the way by the time Metallica released One as their first video Megadeth had 5 videos, including the covers Anarchy in the UK and No More Mister Nice Guy) Listen, if you don't like Metallica that's fine but if you want to discuss at least get your facts straight. Megadeth never said they wouldn't have a video. It's not the video, it's the "Oh, nevermind" factor that always bugged me about that. As for the Cliff 'em All footage, they were supporting acts in every one those festival shots. They only headlined the shows in Germany, which weren't arena sized. (I wore out at least two Cliff 'em All VHS's shortly after they were released )
Kimbabig Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 I'm tempted to get that book. What does he say about the ownership of those songs in it? You should get it man, it's a great read. And he felt his name should've been first in the credits not last. He also was angry they used his stuff when he told them not to.
Riffster Posted December 31, 2011 Posted December 31, 2011 Megadeth never said they wouldn't have a video. It's not the video, it's the "Oh, nevermind" factor that always bugged me about that. As for the Cliff 'em All footage, they were supporting acts in every one those festival shots. They only headlined the shows in Germany, which weren't arena sized. (I wore out at least two Cliff 'em All VHS's shortly after they were released ) Well that is shifting gears then in'it? Metallica always said they would not do videos, to me it was dissapointing, I wanted them to do videos, I was too young and too broke to attend their shows then, Megadeth had videos, it eventually sunk in that Metallica "needed" to make videos, then even Slayer made videos. Maybe they were all opening acts in Cliff'em All but you also assuming that the folks attending those concerts were there for the main act. I disregard the notion that the video One gave them the fame they needed to headline huge arenas, Metallica had a huge following already.
FirstMeasure Posted January 1, 2012 Posted January 1, 2012 Well that is shifting gears then in'it? Metallica always said they would not do videos, to me it was dissapointing, I wanted them to do videos, I was too young and too broke to attend their shows then, Megadeth had videos, it eventually sunk in that Metallica "needed" to make videos, then even Slayer made videos. Maybe they were all opening acts in Cliff'em All but you also assuming that the folks attending those concerts were there for the main act. I disregard the notion that the video One gave them the fame they needed to headline huge arenas, Metallica had a huge following already. You can disregard fact as notion, but the facts remains. Master of Puppets reached #29 on the Billboard Charts, ...And Justice for All reached #6. That is what got them headlining arena's and festivals. I ain't making this stuff up, "One" got them mainstream attention. It was, after all, their first Top 40 single. It's all right there in the Billboard archives. Not to mention, we were there, we saw it happen.
Riffster Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 I was looking for one of my posts and saw your answer, and since you are not trusting me as a source I had to look it up. Sure they were successful before "...And Justice For All", but it was the Video for "One" that got them headlining huge arena shows. Like I said before, not really. Maybe they were all opening acts in Cliff'em All but you also assuming that the folks attending those concerts were there for the main act. I disregard the notion that the video One gave them the fame they needed to headline huge arenas, Metallica had a huge following already. Metallica opened for Ozzy the first part of the tour (I hope you saw the Metal Evolution Thrash Metal episode that aired after I made this comment ) they headlined the second half. You can disregard fact as notion, but the facts remains. Master of Puppets reached #29 on the Billboard Charts, ...And Justice for All reached #6. That is what got them headlining arena's and festivals. I ain't making this stuff up, "One" got them mainstream attention. It was, after all, their first Top 40 single. It's all right there in the Billboard archives. Not to mention, we were there, we saw it happen. Facts eh? KIll'em All released in 1983, peaked #155 on Billboard in 1986 (MOP year) Ride the Lightning released in 1984, peaked #100 on Billboard in 1985 (can you say word to mouth) Master of Puppets released in 1985, peaked #26 on Billboard the same year, (if #26 on Billboard the same year as release is not mainstream I don't know what is) also can you see the trend? And last but not least... And Justice For All released on August 25,1988 peaked #6 the same year! in only 4 months!! The tour Damaged Justice headlining Metallica started Sept 11,1988. "One" video debuted January 20, 1989, yep, 5 months after the release of AJFA, 4 months after Metallica started headlining their entire tour, one month after AJFA had reached #6. I remember the video coming out much later than the album which is unusual because typically you would see the video first. Yea maybe the song One reached top 40, was that 1989? The song was sa hit without a video, that is why they ended up doing a video not the other way around. I think reaching #6 with an entire Thrash Metal album is incredible. Note from the Damaged Justice Tour: Around halfway through the tour as the "One" single and video became more successful, it moved further down the setlist to the first encore, and "Fade To Black" would take it's spot between "Master Of Puppets" and "Seek & Destroy".
AlanH Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 My assessment of Metallica is that their first album had some great songs, musicality and arrangments but it was very poorly produced. RtL was about OK while MoP was their muscial peak without Mustaine- there were some great songs on that record. They then tailed off with AJFA until Bob Rock captured a great guitar tone and polished rawness that catapulted them in to the big time. After that, I never bought anything else of theirs so I can't comment.
Thundergod Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Never got into Metallica. Not even during the early 90s when they were even more famous than guns n roses LOL I have always loved metal and music in general but there are certain bands I just never got into. Most of them are really famous and I think that's one of the main reasons I never got into them.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.