Page 2 of 4

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:50 pm
by BritSox
This is probably as pro-metallica list as you'll find, includes only metal albums, and still has only three in the top 64, whilst you'll notice the prominent placing of non-contenders Reign In Blood and Number Of The Beast.

Though I'm sure you'll find plenty of individuals who rate all the early Metallica albums as top 10 ever.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:56 pm
by ThatDude
BritSox wrote:This is probably as pro-metallica list as you'll find, includes only metal albums, and still has only three in the top 64, whilst you'll notice the prominent placing of non-contenders Reign In Blood and Number Of The Beast.

Though I'm sure you'll find plenty of individuals who rate all the early Metallica albums as top 10 ever.


I'd have no problem including Reign In Blood and Number of the Beast, in fact, they should be there.


And looking briefly over that list, I'm not sure how Zeppelin's IV got onto a metal list. Not that I don't like that album, far from it, I just don't see how it fits.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:58 pm
by Another Blown Save
BritSox wrote:This is probably as pro-metallica list as you'll find, includes only metal albums, and still has only three in the top 64, whilst you'll notice the prominent placing of non-contenders Reign In Blood and Number Of The Beast.

Though I'm sure you'll find plenty of individuals who rate all the early Metallica albums as top 10 ever.

Any Metal album list that doesn't have a single Black Sabbath album automatically loses all credibility.

Anyways, we don't need 3 Metallica albums in this thing, nor do we need to add Korn (unless we can find a less deserving album on the list)

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:00 pm
by ThatDude
Another Blown Save wrote:Any Metal album list that doesn't have a single Black Sabbath album automatically loses all credibility.


Um, Sabbath is all over that list.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:00 pm
by BritSox
ThatDude wrote:
BritSox wrote:This is probably as pro-metallica list as you'll find, includes only metal albums, and still has only three in the top 64, whilst you'll notice the prominent placing of non-contenders Reign In Blood and Number Of The Beast.

Though I'm sure you'll find plenty of individuals who rate all the early Metallica albums as top 10 ever.


I'd have no problem including Reign In Blood and Number of the Beast, in fact, they should be there.


And looking briefly over that list, I'm not sure how Zeppelin's IV got onto a metal list. Not that I don't like that album, far from it, I just don't see how it fits.


Definition of 'metal' is tough. There are people who'd include Motley Crue (read the 80s press cuttings- almost universally considered 'heavy metal' until metallica redefined the genre) and there are people who wouldn't count the black album (ludicrous- it's heavier than Back In Black).

PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:22 pm
by Another Blown Save
ThatDude wrote:
Another Blown Save wrote:Any Metal album list that doesn't have a single Black Sabbath album automatically loses all credibility.


Um, Sabbath is all over that list.

Sorry, I meant Black Sabbath album in top 10

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:21 am
by The Artful Dodger
BritSox wrote:
ThatDude wrote:
BritSox wrote:This is probably as pro-metallica list as you'll find, includes only metal albums, and still has only three in the top 64, whilst you'll notice the prominent placing of non-contenders Reign In Blood and Number Of The Beast.

Though I'm sure you'll find plenty of individuals who rate all the early Metallica albums as top 10 ever.


I'd have no problem including Reign In Blood and Number of the Beast, in fact, they should be there.


And looking briefly over that list, I'm not sure how Zeppelin's IV got onto a metal list. Not that I don't like that album, far from it, I just don't see how it fits.


Definition of 'metal' is tough. There are people who'd include Motley Crue (read the 80s press cuttings- almost universally considered 'heavy metal' until metallica redefined the genre) and there are people who wouldn't count the black album (ludicrous- it's heavier than Back In Black).


True, metal is quite a diverse genre in that its roots are in classic rock bands such as Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, and of course, Black Sabbath. Then you have your NWOBHM: Iron Maiden and Judas Priest primarily, which then had some influence on Bay Area Thrash (Metallica, Slayer, Megadeth, and Anthrax), which in turn had some influence in European/Teutonic Thrash (Kreator, Sodom, Destruction to name a few). At that time, hair metal was running parallel in the 80's, which of course, was a more commercial-friendly variant of metal, and the fans with thrash allegiances don't consider hair metal to be metal at all. Somewhere along the way, Death Metal was born in the late 80's which has Thrash influences, but was a lot more visceral-sounding than Thrash (of course, Death Metal got its name from the band Death not necessarily because of the sound, mind you). At around the same time, Black Metal was born and today, it seems the line between some Death Metal and Black Metal is quite blurry. Then, you have Pantera, which influenced the nu metal bands (i.e. Korn, Deftones, Disturbed). I didn't touch upon Grindcore, Progressive Metal, and Power Metal, mind you.

Sorry for the history lesson, but actually, I don't think a Battle of Metal Bands list is that great of an idea. For one, there's quite a boatload of metal bands that either have significant influence on the metal landscape or are considered to be tops in the genre and the bands in that particular sub-genre aren't all that distinguishable. Let's say you wanted to put a good bunch of death metal bands. I can tell you that most death metal sounds fairly alike just because it's not as stylized, for lack of a better term, as thrash or NWOBHM can be. Even though comparing one rock band with another rock band is a lot like comparing apples to oranges, I think it's a better tale of the tape comparison than if you were doing a strictly metal list.

I haven't checked out the list thread in its entirety, but I think Anthrax, Megadeth, and Slayer should be mentioned if they haven't already in the Battle.

As for PJ, I voted neither.

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:25 am
by pokerplaya
Lot of PJ hate in this thread....

voted Vs. but I love them both. ;-D

PJ>Nirvana ;-D

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:06 am
by BritSox
pokerplaya wrote:Lot of PJ hate in this thread....

voted Vs. but I love them both. ;-D

PJ>Nirvana ;-D


That's so untrue it's laughable. :-D Time to break out the t-shirt.

Image

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:41 am
by Yoda
BritSox wrote:
pokerplaya wrote:Lot of PJ hate in this thread....

voted Vs. but I love them both. ;-D

PJ>Nirvana ;-D


That's so untrue it's laughable. :-D Time to break out the t-shirt.

Image


I love Pearl Jam as much as the next guy (their concert in the 90s were insane) but there is freaking way that they are better than Nirvana.