Album Rating: 3.5

Played this and then The Tallest Man on Earth back to back. When the latter finished my 4 year old asked if I could go back to playing the good music again and then started dancing to the title track. I think my toddler might be more hardcore than I am?

@Trey @Willie My first post on this site, so bear with me!

Great review Trey. Nicely balanced.

I've listened to this album twice. It's what I was expecting.

Pros:

I still enjoy hearing James' voice. As far as I'm concerned, he can still sing. And well for his age. Nothing wrong with the album vocally.

There's a few parts when the band stepped away from the mostly locked in guitars/bass doing the exact same thing which were great. Parts were Kirk/James do a cool harmonising riff. Or you can hear Rob's bass doing something interesting underneath the guitars. (More of that please!)

If Darkness Had a Son is a great song.

Cons:

The production to my ears is the same as Death Magnetic/Hardwired. Modern and bland.

Kirk's solos. Someone else made the comment that his last great solos were on the Black album. I disagree. He did some amazing solos on the Load/Reload albums too. Lots of feeling and catchy moments. I didn't hear much memorable soloing on 72 Seasons. (Or Death Magnetic/Hardwired). He's one of my favourite guitarists, so I don't like writing this. He seems to be mindlessly jamming his way through each and every song.

It all sounds far too similar to Death Magnetic/Hardwired. There's no progression musically from those 2 albums. It's as if they've found a safe sound and are sticking with it. From Kill em All/Lightning/Puppets/Justice/Black Album, there was a fantastic gradual progression of interesting stuff. On Load/Reload, at least they had the balls to try something different. (I liked those albums). On St Anger, they tried something different again for better or worse. It didn't really work, but I still go back to that album now and again. At least it's experimental.

Would it kill them to include a clean/acoustic guitar passage now and again? It's not a deal breaker for me, but with these songs, the occasional clean part might make the heavy riffs shine a bit more.

I'd love to hear Rob more. I don't mean I'm expecting mad slap bass stuff! I just mean I'd like to hear him do something slightly different from the guitars more often. He's mostly following James' riffs identically (as usual.) Ciff used to do some very different stuff in the background, so why can't Rob? He's an amazing bass player in his own right.

The songs are mostly far too long with too many repeated riffs.

The yellow album art. No.

Album Rating: 3.4 | Sound Off

@Sowing:Ha ha. You should be proud.

Might as well drop this blast from the past... electronic covers of Metallica:

One: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drWmMXQvoJw

Blackened: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeoLnwM98aE

The Unforgiven:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfN60n6BVjk

Album Rating: 3.5

his last outstanding solo was probably “the unforgiven 3”, but his solos for “spit out the bone” and “my apocalypse” were good too. I really cant recall any good solos like that here



“Halo on fire” had a great one too

Album Rating: 3.0

I'm really digging the end of the album, there is a weird riff in Inamorata that is interesting at the beginning.



Also the dual guitar melodies are pretty good. But yeah Lars, if only he could be a bit less repetitive, it feels like listening to ACDC...

Album Rating: 3.4 | Sound Off

I hear the same negatives as everyone else, they just don't affect me as intensely as some of the other people posting here.



Also, I understand why it is the way it is and why we'll never get another powerful Metallica album. Essentially, they're too big to fail. Lulu, St. Anger, that movie they made that flopped... a shrug of the shoulders, a tax write-off, and moving on. There's no fear of failure, there's no fear of losing their career or being dropped from their label (they own their label too), there's no fire to do something better because at that age they know they can't... so every half-decade or so they get together to jam out some new tunes and go back on tour (which is the part they seem to still love). The fact they even make new albums at all is probably all James' idea. It's like when these rookie football players get their big payout on their second deal, and then their output plummets. They made it, there's no more drive and no more motivation.

Album Rating: 3.0

"They made it, there's no more drive and no more motivation."



Possibly that, but at the same time, they've now been ultramega-successful for approximately 2/3rds of their lives. The desire to make good stuff might be there, but the reference points and problems they have aren't those of young, broke, hungry guys at the forefront of a burgeoning genre.



At this point, I'd say that they themselves are their only frame of reference, and as they've been comfortable for so long, it's hard for them to innovate even if they go in intending to.

Album Rating: 3.0

I'm always happy when a new Metallica comes out, I mean they are still enjoyable, but completely flawed and sometimes it is just too much. Lars's drumming, although I respect the guy a lot for what he has done, is really generic and uninspired. It almost feels amateur, but again, props to him what he has done in his career.



I dig bands like this that just have fun, and that probably is the case here. I'm looking forward to their two nights in Paris, bought the tickets as soon as I saw this crazy tour

Album Rating: 3.5

The new Overkill obliterates this to shreds (no pun intended!). It's just as good as Ironbound.

Album Rating: 3.5

I didnt even know they dropped one until yesterday. Gonna check that out. Im sure it’s great.

Album Rating: 4.0

"At this point, I'd say that they themselves are their only frame of reference, and as they've been comfortable for so long, it's hard for them to innovate even if they go in intending to."



in the kirk interview linked on the last page... kirk says something along the lines of "the only three actually good guitarists who sweep are yngwie, satriani, and paul gilbert"... which comes off like he hasn't paid attention to anything that's come out since the 80s

Worst album art of all time for a metal record

Album Rating: 2.0

Funny that Overkill released an album that obliterates this on the same exact day

-- The new Overkill obliterates this to shreds

Agreed

Album Rating: 3.0

"Worst album art of all time for a metal record"



No. It isn't. It's a fool's errand, as approximately 1-2 pages from now, someone will 100% make the same derpy gripe, but here you go:



https://loudwire.com/awful-metal-album-covers/



Worse.

Album Rating: 3.0

The art is yellow which is syn lol it of sunblock

Album Rating: 3.4 | Sound Off

--Possibly that, but at the same time, they've now been ultramega-successful for approximately 2/3rds of their lives. The desire to make good stuff might be there, but the reference points and problems they have aren't those of young, broke, hungry guys at the forefront of a burgeoning genre.

At this point, I'd say that they themselves are their only frame of reference, and as they've been comfortable for so long, it's hard for them to innovate even if they go in intending to.--

--in the kirk interview linked on the last page... kirk says something along the lines of "the only three actually good guitarists who sweep are yngwie, satriani, and paul gilbert"... which comes off like he hasn't paid attention to anything that's come out since the 80s--

That makes sense. Who's going to tell them they're doing something wrong? They own their music, they own their record label, they're bigger than the producers they use, and oh yeah, they're making millions. Who would stand up to them, and who could even make a valid point about them doing something wrong when they're about to go on tour and make millions more based on their own decisions?

As for the sweeping comment, it just goes to show that the older you get the less you pay attention to new music. I've also noticed a lot of established musicians pay even less attention to new music than your average listener.

--Funny that Overkill released an album that obliterates this on the same exact day--

... and yet this review has 298 comments and 23,000 views, while not even Pizza has bothered to shit out a review on the new Overkill. What does that say about the fan base and their tastes or at least their convictions and drive to go beyond a few shitposts here while they do nothing to highlight anything that's 'better'.

^^True, but on the site’s trending albums, Overkill’s new album is no. 15 (momentarily, even), and Metallica's is nowhere to be found.

I’d say, with the risk of erring, that more people here are wondering why there’s not a review for the new Overkill, than people arguing about Metallica in this thread.

lmao why is willie so defensive

Some ppl hate hyperbole smh re: worst metal art ever