(Metal) Metallica - St. Anger

firemoth12 · 11-18-2003, 03:04 PM

St. Anger

Track List:

1. Frantic
2. St. Anger
3. Some Kind of Monster
4. Dirty Window
5. Invisible Kid
6. My World
7. Shoot Me Again
8. Sweet Amber
9. The Unnamed Feeling
10. Purify
11. All Within My Hands

Review:

Before this album came out, people were really anticipating it. They were thinking it would be back to the roots of old Metallica, with the thrash, speed metal kind of stuff. In a way, it is. It many more ways, it isn't.

The CD comes in nice paper packaging with the CD, the bonus DVD (of them rehearsing every track), the booklet (which contains all lyrics and a picture of the band), and a slip of paper which gives you access to more Metallica music online.

The music is very heavy, no doubt metal, but I think they tried too hard when they were making it. They were trying to make it sound raw, agressive, and angry. But they ended up with raw, agressive, angry, and uninspired music. They simply overdid it.

However this doesn't mean it's all bad.

What I like:

Instrumentals - Even though the production is horrible (which I'll get to later), I like the guitar riffs, and the drumming. It is very fitting for this kind of music, and Lars does a good job with the double bass.

Concept - They wanted heavier, more agressive thrash, and they tried. The deserve credit for that.

What I don't like:

Production - (or lack of). Cmon guys, you could have made this sound so much better if the production was good. The tin-can sound of the snare annoys the hell out of me. The guitars sound horrible in terms of production. They are low, and muddy while the drums are trebly and ringy. I read somewhere that Protools was used to copy and paste things within the music. Well, why? The songs sound choppy and repetetive because of that and the lack of content.

Hetfield's singing - I noticed that in several songs James tries to get to a note with his voice that he is simply unable to. Sometimes, I cringe because it feels like his voice is about to crack. Also, it is off-key a lot, and that doesn't help. Make the singing match to the instrumentals and it will sound so much better.

Lack of Solos - The lack of a guitar solo in a song does not automatically irritate me. I like many bands that solo very little and a song can still be wonderful without a solo. But on this album, I noticed many spots that could have been filled with a nice guitar solo, and it is such a shame that they weren't.

Overall:

Once in a while, I will listen to this album. But, it is very hard to listen to the whole songs. They get boring, and choppy. If they improved the production, added a solo here and there, and told Hetfield to sing in key to match with the music all the time, it would have been an enjoyable record to listen to. It is only those specific things that make this album bad.

Favorite songs: All Within My Hands, Some Kind of Monster, Shoot Me Again

2/5

Distorted Vision · 11-18-2003, 03:10 PM

1/5, Metallica's worst album

MxShredder · 11-18-2003, 03:28 PM

Also, on the DVD, they are playing a few songs (im not sure which ones) for the first time ever, WHILE it is being recorded

I'll give it a 2.5\5

11-18-2003, 07:31 PM

They purposely wanted it to sound bad to break away from last century...I understand trying something new but they had it good.

sting-ray · 11-18-2003, 08:05 PM

the drums sounded bad, the guitars weren't metallica-like, the vocals were not as sharp... St. Anger is not a bad album compared to some other stuff out there, but it is themselves. I like a few songs on the album, but overall igive it a:

1.5/5

Drunk Hobo · 11-19-2003, 11:45 AM

Good review man, I was expecting "St. Anger ****ing sucks!". I don't mind the album, the songs get repetitive when they go on for seven minutes with no solos.

Good job

2.5/5

Prodigal_Suns_Rock · 11-19-2003, 07:34 PM

The songs do get really repetitive. The lyrics are also really bad. They seem like James is just makin **** up. It took me a bit but i did eventually get into the album. I have to go from start to end though.

Prodigal_Suns_Rock · 11-19-2003, 07:35 PM

oh yeah, 2/5

AbandonedD · 11-21-2003, 06:19 AM

Cashallica, Selloutica... need to spend time MAKING the music then counting they money the MAKING...

11-21-2003, 07:18 PM

.5/5

Worst album ever

MxShredder · 11-21-2003, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by iloveteddy
.5/5

Worst album ever

no

BlindKoRnKid · 11-21-2003, 10:19 PM

1/5
i thought this was their worst album

i didnt like that they didnt have any real long guitar solos and stuff

i think that metallica is turning in the nu-metal

i think that they should go back to their roots and make some more harder guitar riffs and some killer solos from Kirk Hammet!!

~~hybridofsound~~ · 11-22-2003, 04:38 PM

I've just borrowed this cd off a friend and really I have to agree with the reviewer. What the hell is up with the production. The drums sound terible. I hope the album they produce next is a huge step away from this.

sting-ray · 11-22-2003, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AbandonedD
Cashallica, Selloutica... need to spend time MAKING the music then counting they money the MAKING...

their time is simply over, you cant expect a band to make great music for over 20 years. In my mind they just wanted their music to stay relevant with the period.

Bartender · 11-22-2003, 05:34 PM

I probably agree with 2.5/5...I've had a friend of mine bitching at me for weeks now about how its not fair to judge an album against the band's past output, which I've consistently tried to tell him is crap - you can't just forget that Metallica have made some of the best music in the past two decades.

Also, I hate the fact that people say "How can you say its not that bad?? Its Metallica's worst album!!". Well of course its their worst album - they're Metallica. Every band has a worst album, and, for example, Zeppelin's worst still kicks the **** out of a good majority of the bands out there.

Anyway, good review

Congrats on avoiding what I just did and treating this like another rock and metal St Anger thread :/

manuscriptreplica · 11-24-2003, 07:39 AM

i tend to agree with Bartender - just because its **** compared to old metallica doesnt make it the worst album ever and deserving of .5/5. like really, you cannot possibly conceive a good charlotte CD is better than this.
i gave it a 3/5... i couldnt really care if they 'sold out' im sure they had enough money that they didnt need to go mainstream to get more money, its to expand their fan base. i am sure their next album will be back to 80's metallica and everyone will love them again.
well thats what i think anyways

Zmev · 11-25-2003, 02:21 AM

3/5, the songs were heavy but the lyrics and vocals were crap

mettalicat · 11-25-2003, 11:40 AM

I was really dissapointed with st anger. There is so much wrong with it that could have been easily put right. Metallica are moving away from what they are good at, and while I respect that, I feel that the whole thing sounded pretty badly thought out.

11-25-2003, 07:50 PM

It's not easy being the best band ever

Ecu · 11-29-2003, 05:46 AM

2.5/5

Production : -1
Repetitive and boring riffs : -1
Bad vocals : -1
75 minutes music (when other bands sell 35 minutes records at the same price), and DVD inside : +0.5

11-18-2003, 03:04 PM	#1
firemoth12 Registered User Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 240	(Metal) Metallica - St. Anger St. Anger Track List: 1. Frantic 2. St. Anger 3. Some Kind of Monster 4. Dirty Window 5. Invisible Kid 6. My World 7. Shoot Me Again 8. Sweet Amber 9. The Unnamed Feeling 10. Purify 11. All Within My Hands Review: Before this album came out, people were really anticipating it. They were thinking it would be back to the roots of old Metallica, with the thrash, speed metal kind of stuff. In a way, it is. It many more ways, it isn't. The CD comes in nice paper packaging with the CD, the bonus DVD (of them rehearsing every track), the booklet (which contains all lyrics and a picture of the band), and a slip of paper which gives you access to more Metallica music online. The music is very heavy, no doubt metal, but I think they tried too hard when they were making it. They were trying to make it sound raw, agressive, and angry. But they ended up with raw, agressive, angry, and uninspired music. They simply overdid it. However this doesn't mean it's all bad. What I like: Instrumentals - Even though the production is horrible (which I'll get to later), I like the guitar riffs, and the drumming. It is very fitting for this kind of music, and Lars does a good job with the double bass. Concept - They wanted heavier, more agressive thrash, and they tried. The deserve credit for that. What I don't like: Production - (or lack of). Cmon guys, you could have made this sound so much better if the production was good. The tin-can sound of the snare annoys the hell out of me. The guitars sound horrible in terms of production. They are low, and muddy while the drums are trebly and ringy. I read somewhere that Protools was used to copy and paste things within the music. Well, why? The songs sound choppy and repetetive because of that and the lack of content. Hetfield's singing - I noticed that in several songs James tries to get to a note with his voice that he is simply unable to. Sometimes, I cringe because it feels like his voice is about to crack. Also, it is off-key a lot, and that doesn't help. Make the singing match to the instrumentals and it will sound so much better. Lack of Solos - The lack of a guitar solo in a song does not automatically irritate me. I like many bands that solo very little and a song can still be wonderful without a solo. But on this album, I noticed many spots that could have been filled with a nice guitar solo, and it is such a shame that they weren't. Overall: Once in a while, I will listen to this album. But, it is very hard to listen to the whole songs. They get boring, and choppy. If they improved the production, added a solo here and there, and told Hetfield to sing in key to match with the music all the time, it would have been an enjoyable record to listen to. It is only those specific things that make this album bad. Favorite songs: All Within My Hands, Some Kind of Monster, Shoot Me Again 2/5 Last edited by firemoth12; 11-18-2003 at 03:10 PM.

11-25-2003, 02:21 AM	#17
Zmev I smoke nugs Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Bay Area CA Posts: 17,826	3/5, the songs were heavy but the lyrics and vocals were crap
	Digging: Superchunk - No Pocky For Kitty

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

11-18-2003, 03:10 PM	#2
Distorted Vision Synchestra Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Bristol Posts: 4,853	1/5, Metallica's worst album

11-18-2003, 03:28 PM	#3
MxShredder (1 Viewing) Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Canada :) Posts: 1,742	Also, on the DVD, they are playing a few songs (im not sure which ones) for the first time ever, WHILE it is being recorded I'll give it a 2.5\5

11-18-2003, 07:31 PM	#4
Agrotath Guest Posts: n/a	They purposely wanted it to sound bad to break away from last century...I understand trying something new but they had it good.

11-18-2003, 08:05 PM	#5
sting-ray sunset on Ibiza Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 11,875	the drums sounded bad, the guitars weren't metallica-like, the vocals were not as sharp... St. Anger is not a bad album compared to some other stuff out there, but it is themselves. I like a few songs on the album, but overall igive it a: 1.5/5

11-19-2003, 11:45 AM	#6
Drunk Hobo Party hard, party good! Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Pontypridd, South Wales Posts: 777	Good review man, I was expecting "St. Anger ****ing sucks!". I don't mind the album, the songs get repetitive when they go on for seven minutes with no solos. Good job 2.5/5

11-19-2003, 07:34 PM	#7
Prodigal_Suns_Rock They Call Me SULLY! Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 361	The songs do get really repetitive. The lyrics are also really bad. They seem like James is just makin **** up. It took me a bit but i did eventually get into the album. I have to go from start to end though.

11-19-2003, 07:35 PM	#8
Prodigal_Suns_Rock They Call Me SULLY! Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 361	oh yeah, 2/5

11-21-2003, 06:19 AM	#9
AbandonedD Registered User Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 14	Cashallica, Selloutica... need to spend time MAKING the music then counting they money the MAKING...

11-21-2003, 07:18 PM	#10
iloveteddy Guest Posts: n/a	.5/5 Worst album ever

11-21-2003, 10:19 PM	#12
BlindKoRnKid Registered User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Indiana...The Fort Posts: 16	1/5 i thought this was their worst album i didnt like that they didnt have any real long guitar solos and stuff i think that metallica is turning in the nu-metal i think that they should go back to their roots and make some more harder guitar riffs and some killer solos from Kirk Hammet!!

11-22-2003, 04:38 PM	#13
~~hybridofsound~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 8,431	I've just borrowed this cd off a friend and really I have to agree with the reviewer. What the hell is up with the production. The drums sound terible. I hope the album they produce next is a huge step away from this.

11-22-2003, 05:34 PM	#15
Bartender morrissey approved Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Lamuella Posts: 25,762	I probably agree with 2.5/5...I've had a friend of mine bitching at me for weeks now about how its not fair to judge an album against the band's past output, which I've consistently tried to tell him is crap - you can't just forget that Metallica have made some of the best music in the past two decades. Also, I hate the fact that people say "How can you say its not that bad?? Its Metallica's worst album!!". Well of course its their worst album - they're Metallica. Every band has a worst album, and, for example, Zeppelin's worst still kicks the **** out of a good majority of the bands out there. Anyway, good review Congrats on avoiding what I just did and treating this like another rock and metal St Anger thread :/

11-24-2003, 07:39 AM	#16
manuscriptreplica Chef's Knife Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: 45 mins ago I was just a strummer. Now I feel like Clapton. No Joke Posts: 7,794	i tend to agree with Bartender - just because its **** compared to old metallica doesnt make it the worst album ever and deserving of .5/5. like really, you cannot possibly conceive a good charlotte CD is better than this. i gave it a 3/5... i couldnt really care if they 'sold out' im sure they had enough money that they didnt need to go mainstream to get more money, its to expand their fan base. i am sure their next album will be back to 80's metallica and everyone will love them again. well thats what i think anyways

11-25-2003, 11:40 AM	#18
mettalicat zombies are persecuted. Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Atlantis Posts: 65	I was really dissapointed with st anger. There is so much wrong with it that could have been easily put right. Metallica are moving away from what they are good at, and while I respect that, I feel that the whole thing sounded pretty badly thought out.

11-25-2003, 07:50 PM	#19
Agrotath Guest Posts: n/a	It's not easy being the best band ever

11-29-2003, 05:46 AM	#20
Ecu Mad drummer Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Geneva-switzerland Posts: 28	2.5/5 Production : -1 Repetitive and boring riffs : -1 Bad vocals : -1 75 minutes music (when other bands sell 35 minutes records at the same price), and DVD inside : +0.5