[QUOTE=dougefresh]3/5

Much better than Load or Reload, all though I didn't like the fact that they had no solos, James' voice was weird and the drums sounded like sh[i][/i]it[/QUOTE]
123

Everyone get over the fact that the drums sound bad, many great albums have poor production, and I don't hear them whinging about the drums, stop being such Metallica fanboys and listen to music outside the mainstream for a change

I'm glad theyre back, but it simply aint as good as it used to be, why would you wanna listen to st anger when theres ride the lightning master of puppets and the black album?
The drums get on my nerves, they sound very tinny and the guitars are a bit off but i can live with that, a solo woulda been nice though

With the whole solos thing, they did add in solos after all the songs were done but they sounded just like that, an afterthought, like they'd just been tacked on for aesthetics.

I'm one of the few who liked this album. At least they're trying something new and the production for RTL & KTA wasn't that great either.

This album isn't as bad as everyone says. 3/5

It's not great, but it's ok.

[QUOTE=Superpeer]Worst Metallica cd I've heard.
Nonetheless 3/5[/QUOTE]

Seems like I've already said that. :lol:

[QUOTE]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. [/QUOTE]

Hey sting-ray... one word. Ramones.

Thought Lar's drumming was good but they were slacking on the guitar with the lack of guitar solos it was mostly just wanking off

i wouldnt go as far to say metallica worst album there were remember load of crap and reload of crap which metallica did "sell out" in St anger its a new song with a Drop D 2000s sound which isnt metallica best stuff but this album is a new style with heavy bass licks and mad lyrics overal buying it is worth it because metallica is one of the best bands ever

Metallica hasn't put out a good album since 91 or so.

/personalopinion

[QUOTE=jade75X]Thought Lar's drumming was good [/QUOTE]

nah he was trying to be better than he is, and it just sounded like ****

KILL, KILL, KILL, KILL, KILL, KILL, KILL, KILL

:lol: :lol: When I heard that the first time, I just had to crack up. Definetly the worst offering from a disgustingly washed up band.

[QUOTE=remreemerer]hahahahaha i love your review man....anywho to the cd i have read only this page but so far i can tell most ppl who have reviewed this cd are inexerienced morons who pretend to know stuff about music(im not pretending to i dont know anything but my own opinion).

anyway someone said the drums sucked thats because the snare was sooooo low it sounded like trash cans umm poeple keep saying kirk neede more solos well you see its verry difficult to write a solo and they didnt spend too much time on this album because james just got out of rehab. anyhwo in my opinion all of their stuff is awsome the new cd isnt my style and it isnt metallicas however they do what they want and the fan i am i support them its not like its horrible music. in fact compared to most metal out there st anger was great.

someone said they had the guitars turned down too low? moron its the distortion and tuning they used a completely different distortion than noraml. umm lets see bass is fine the new bassist rob is great in concert(not from experience but my best friend toured with them last summer in wich they rarely played st anger stuff) he has energy and plays well.

i personally think the reason for the low quality of st anger was becasue they all kinda just got all cleaned up and needed something to fall back on also part of it was the producer of the albums fault.
coments on their old stuff i like most of their stuff equally Favorite album by them is S&M but favorite song is call of the ktulu wich is on S&M and Ride the Lightning :naughty:[/QUOTE]

Now you mentioned that it is very hard to come up with solos and they didnt have very much time, but if you knew anything about Metallica you would know that Kirk can make up solos very easily. He said in their movie one and a half years that he jams at night and makes them up right there. He also mentions that his solos come from any thing that sounds like it would go good with the song they are writing. I know the fact that James had just came out of rehab before they made St. Anger but his voice makes me cringe, and James what happened to the genius lyrics, if you listen to the older stuff compared to the new stuff as far as im concerned the new stuff sucks, really anything from the past decade hasnt been that great expect for S&M. Lars snare sounds like crap, I started to like Rob more after I saw Metallica in concert but I still think Cliff was GOD on bass. :thumb:

......Ummmmmm no........



Alex

I find it quite humourus how the band compared this to Meshuggah before its release

[QUOTE=AntiHero3314]:eek: no way... are you serious?![/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure there was alot of articles about this before St. Angers release

[QUOTE=Knifeboy]I find it quite humourus how the band compared this to Meshuggah before its release[/QUOTE]

So Metallica said themselves that it was like Meshuggah? Holy moley

Metallica wanted to make a nu-metal album, and I think they did a good job. Of course all their other albums were better though...

Master of puppets and S&M rocks

A return to form...

I gotta say I'm surprised so many people hate this album. So the snare drum sound is 'different', some of the lyrics are a bit crap, theres no solos and it's under produced. But for me it's their best effort since master of puppets in 1986. Metallica were my favourite band back then. Then Justice for all came out and it became clear that the band were going a bit soft and commercial. The black album on it's own was pretty good but it was nothing new. It was made to sell and that's what it did but there was none of the spark or aggression or the '**** em all and ****in no regrets' attitude of the first three albums.
Lots of airtime, sold out stadium tours and MTV appearances came in the 1990's but they had become a tired old band with few new ideas. All the original fans were buying Machine Head and Pantera cd's instead.
As for load and reload - just four millionaires going about their day job. The band had become everything they were against in the early days. The napster case confirmed this.
Now in 2004 we've got a new sound, a new bassist and a new James Hetfield. No guitar solos? I didn't even notice until the third or fourth listen and besides, what does Kirk have to prove. I'm sure the barely produced sound annoys some people but, if like me, you prefer to see a band live showing what they can really do without the overdubs and guest musicians etc then this a breath of fresh air. I almost prefer listening to the DVD for this reason.
As for this being a nu-metal album - bollox. Its an evolution of how they sounded in the 80's - it's fresh, it's heavy and it sounds like they're playing music for themselves again and not for MTV or radio. Respect to them for doing that.
Some of the lyrics are a bit cheesy and some of the tracks drag on a bit so I'll give it a 4.5/5 but I've no doubt that this one of their greatest. And when the newer fans say they hate it then that can only be a good thing.

A 4.5/5 for an underproduced album with no solos, crap lyrics, songs that drag on, and trashcan drums? I know some people cum at the mention of the name "Metallica", but a 4.5 is great outside the genre, and from the sound of things, it's not a great album even within the genre.

Under produced and no solos can be a good thing. Ever heard an album called Nevermind?

Nope.

[QUOTE=Fuddmeister]Under produced and no solos can be a good thing. Ever heard an album called Nevermind?[/QUOTE]
Yes, and it's a terrible album. Not to mention an over-produced one that quite obviously DOES feature guitar solos.

What has Kirk got to prove? Nothing, you're right, but so what, does that mean he can't put a solo or two in the songs? When I saw them live, they played Dirty Window and Frantic with a couple of solos, they sounded great

I have to admit, I thought it was a pitiful album was well. Old Metallica kicks way more as[b][i][/b][/i]s.

A song by song description would have been nice...to laugh at :upset:

I thought St. Anger was a great album. Yesh there needed to be solos but if you look past that it wasn't al that bad. As a musician I give this album a god review. It sounds from the posts that I am in good company. This album was better than everybody gave it credit for. I can't belive people are bringing them down because of St. Anger. They are an awesome band and even better live. I give it a 4/5. True it is not in the original tradition of Master of Puppets and RTL but I liked it. Good songs.

[QUOTE=Iai]Yes, and it's a terrible album. Not to mention an over-produced one that quite obviously DOES feature guitar solos.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. What was that guy talking about?
I'm with you on this, this album is far better than Nevermind IMO