Talk:Metallica (album)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Metallica (album) was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
August 16, 2011 Peer review Reviewed
September 2, 2011 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Albums (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Metal (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
This article has an assessment summary page.
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject icon A version of this article was copy edited by Baffle gab1978, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 06:52, 10 December 2014 (UTC). The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.

Genre[edit]

Is it really right to call this album 'Thrash Metal'? I mean, the main criticism from 'alienated' fans is that this album deviated from Metallica's normal thrash style, is it not? The article even says 'Gone, for the most part, were the faster staccato riffs during verses and throaty screaming found on the first four albums; the overall speed and complexity of the music were greatly reduced. The Black Album presented a more radio-friendly, commercially accessible Metallica, evidenced by the ballad "Nothing Else Matters"'. Unclejimbo827 12:32, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Heavy Metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.253.21 (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Groove Metal?[edit]

I've noticed some musical similarities between this album and the groove metal scene that would develop soon after. Does anyone think that The Black Album could possibly be one of the first groove metal albums? With all the riffs that meld into one another and the slightly more juvenile lyrics (just an opinion), this album does seem to be a primitive groove metal album, except for Hetfield's vocals, which are nothing like most groove songs. Just tell me if I'm right or wrong, I wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.95.183 (talk) 01:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I totally agree. I find a lot of similarities between this album and the "groove metal" genre. On the "classic albums" documentary for the Black album, one critic even went as far as saying that it introduced a really "grooved" aspect to Metallica. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.10.234.92 (talk) 14:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

So should The Black Album be put into consideration as an early example of groove metal? Its a pretty slow album, only picking up on "Holier Than Thou," "Through the Never," and "The Struggle Within." I know it doesnt sound much like mid 90's Pantera (ugh...) or Machine Head (UGH!), but the basic blueprints of Groove is there: Slow riffs, less serious lyrics, a degree of commercial success/popularity, and of course the fact that Metallica used to be a thrash band, and so many thrash bands jumped on the groove bandwagon (Anthrax and Overkill are the most noticeable ones, and Machine Head was formed out of Vio-Lence). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.84.173.65 (talk) 01:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Pantera released Cowboys From Hell in 1990. Exhorder released Slaughter In The Vatican in 1990. This album sounds nothing like them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.253.21 (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

So? Both of those albums had plenty of thrash influence, particularly Slaughter in the Vatican, which is hardly groove at all. This album leans more to a traditional, straightforward heavy metal sound mixed with the early examples of groovy riffs. Just because Hetfield doesn't sound like as much of a macho douchebag as Phil Anselmo doesn't mean The Black Album isn't a predeterminate of the groove metal sound. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.84.190.12 (talk) 20:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Sepultura described their song Nomad, from Chaos A.D. - a straightforward groove metal album - as influenced by the Black Album. Also, the article says that an editor called the album "progressive thrash" - isn't that a synonym for "groove metal"? 90.154.145.29 (talk) 10:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

You are confusing yourself. White Zombie, Pantera, Machine Head, and Exhorder were all legit groove metal bands that came before this album. However, the low sounds are somewhat groove metaly. This is not groove metal and there was already existing groove metal by this time. So at the very least, this is not groove metal but shares a trait or two, mainly bceause groove metal has already existed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.155.205.17 (talk) 19:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

It contains elements of groove, therefore you can consider it partially groove metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XLAxMetallica (talkcontribs) 03:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

this albums heavy metal and only heavy metal, end of story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.220.148 (talk) 01:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Is that based on your opinion? Do you have a source that says just Heavy Metal? No? So it is just your opinion. And gues what, I disagree. Someone find a source proving this is groove metal because it certainly is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.200.219 (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

This article needs work[edit]

Anyone notice that this article is just one POV statement right after another. I cleaned it some but it needs work. You can see where the initial 'information page' started...and almost track through where little hints of POV statements have weaseled in to make it go from an encyclopedia article to sounding like a conversation between Wayne and Garth. The 'It's metal man!'-'No it ain't Dude!' edits are better left for a teen chat room. And trying to decide what 'metal' is within the confines of a single album description is pointless. Anyone else want to clean the fluff out of it?...it needs a real make-over. Anger22 11:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC) djk

Cover[edit]

The cover picture isn't the right one. Actually, someone added the (almost) right one, but it was reverted. The only mistake by that pic was the fact that it was too contrasted. Could someone add the real album cover, please? --217.84.142.114 15:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

That is the the album cover.24.144.137.244 02:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but the image has very bad quality.. --80.74.110.170 11:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Beginning[edit]

Isn't it a bit silly to start the article with "controversy"? --Big gun 18:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Defacing[edit]

Someone has defaced the page with 'metallica rules' - also i notice on a coupel of other metallica linked pages that there have been swear words put in..maybe someone can check them out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.60.100 (talk) 04:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

But METALLICA does rule !..! 24.144.137.244 02:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

yeah, but they stopped ruling when they hooked up with bob rock. Basically, they ruled, but after making ...And Justice For All, they decided ruling was difficult, so they stopped. The "thrash" songs on this album are all ridiculously simple and lack the face smashing quality present on nearly every song from [kill em' all],[RTL],[MoP], and [...and justice for all]. Oh, and someone has claimed that metallica respected dr. feelgood, but the citation does not support that claim. Also, their stated hatred of the LA metal scene leads me to believe that they did not have respect for the biggest LA metal band. --Matteo (talk) 08:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't that Metallica respected Dr. Feelgood, it was that Metallica like the production of the album, not that they respected the band and the album after that. They still hated Mötley Crüe after that. --Blaguymonkey (talk) 12:24, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:6ae3b2c008a078705cf75010 L.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:6ae3b2c008a078705cf75010 L.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talkcontribsBot) 04:27, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced[edit]

Much of this article is unsourced and that is problematic. This paragraph, however, has so many problems that I have removed it until somebody provides sources:

The Black Album stands as a dividing point for Metallica fans. Its' supporters claim that it is still a "metal" album, while its critics describe it as the beginning of the end for Metallica's greatness. Songs such as "Holier Than Thou", "Through The Never", and "The Struggle Within" show Metallica still practiced elements of thrash, while detractors point to the ballads "Nothing Else Matters" and "The Unforgiven" as signs that Metallica was more interested in commercial gain than catering exclusively to their thrash metal fan base.


If someone can provide sources, please do so. Thanks. Wikipediarules2221 02:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

"The Black Album"[edit]

I could be completely wrong here, but I was under the impression that subtitling this album as "The Black Album" was a sort of tongue in cheek nod to the movie "This is Spinal Tap" ... in which the band members talk about releasing an album with a completely black cover - "... like a black mirror." Maybe this is a connection that only I have made.

Has anyone found any evidence to support this theory? ThreeKings

Yeah, there's a part in A Year and a Half in the Life of Metallica where James and Lars are looking at the finished cover artwork. Lars holds it up and goes, "Spinal Tap lives," and then James says, "The answer is 'none more black.'" --jh51681 (talk) 00:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Album sales:[edit]

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080103/20080103006104.html?.v=1

It's now up to 15,077,000 so please someone update it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.205.43.222 (talk) 00:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I just bought a copy so now it's 15,077,001. 206.169.113.197 (talk) 21:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Worldwide sales for this album is now 25.6 million. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.153.58.213 (talk) 09:20, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Why does this article say they've sold 15 million and also that they've sold 25 million? According to the RIAA, the number is 15 million (15x platinum).


It says they have sold 25million worldwide and 15million in the US, which is correct. - The1337gamer (talk) 17:15, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The article says the album's 300 weeks on the Billboard Top 200 is a record. That's not even close. Dark Side of the Moon has over 1500 weeks on the Top 200 (two streaks of 700+ with a small gap between). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.65.160.82 (talk) 23:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Hammet playing rhythm on Nothing Else Matters[edit]

Is it really true that Kirk Hammet plays rhythm-guitar on Nothing Else Matters? I know that the solo is Hetfields, but that doesn't automatically make Hammet be rhythm-guitar player for that song. It was my understanding that Hetfield plays all guitar on the song. This is confirmed by the wikipedia-page on "Nothing Else Matters". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.231.166.20 (talk) 11:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

From what I understand (I think they mentioned this in a video - possibly Year and a Half..) that Kirk does not play on NEM at all, everything is James. Skeletor2112 (talk) 12:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually Kirk Hammett does play in the song of Nothing Else Matters. He doesn't plays the solos(James Hetfield does), but he plays the some kind of rhythm through through the song that it's hardly to heard. As a musician I can tell you that if only James Hetfield plays the song by himself, it won't sound as good as with Kirk adjustments in the solos and during the whole song. This album rocks thanks to Kirk's contribution with some kind of riffs during James and Jason's solos that make them sound even better than fi they were played with just a single acoustic or electric guitar/bass. Syn aldo (talk) 21:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC) SYN

ok.. you dont seem to understand that James can play as many guitars as he wants in the studio, they can just layer each recording its been said that James plays all guitar tracks (excluding solos he hasnt written) on every album up until Load in 1996. its well known that James plays the solo to Nothing Else Matters. put 2-and-2 together and figure out that James does all the guitar work on Nothing Else Matters.. ALL the guitar work (excluding bass) --Hetfield himself —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.118.130.125 (talk) 13:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I concur, there was an interview in So What! magazine (the fan club one) after Load came out that revealed that Kirk had played rhythm in the studio for the first time Thedarxide (talk) 13:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Genre?[edit]

Metallica is not hard rock album. It's mostly classical heavy metal, but not hard rock (like Load and ReLoad). It also has some thrash metal songs such as The Struggle Within, Trough the Never and Holier Than Thou: they are fast and non-melodic, so they are thrash. Metallica should be classified as heavy metal and thrash metal album, but not hard rock. 80.230.151.231 (talk) 12:06, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. 'Holier Than Thou' and 'Of Wolf and Man' may be more mainstream songs, but that's definitely thrash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MetalKommandant (talkcontribs) 00:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

It should be heavy and thrash, I agree. -MetalKommandant (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you point out which hard rock/heavy metal song on the album qualifies as thrash metal???? The Real Libs-speak politely 18:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
The ones mentioned previously above my comment. "Hard rock". Not even "Nothing Else Matters" or "The Unforgiven" qualifies as hard rock. If you're looking for that, try "Mama Said" or "Low Man's Lyric"... -MetalKommandant (talk) 04:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

In this album's instance, hard rock and heavy metal are interchangeable terms, I don't understand how people don't get that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XLAxMetallica (talkcontribs) 02:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism by 66.116.24.200[edit]

Seen that today there has been a fair bit of "Dan" vandalism by IP address 66.116.24.200. Might be a short term thing, jsut keeping it up to date. sheeldz (talk) 12:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Constant "Evile" frontman plugging?[edit]

Why does every metallica album have a quote from this "Evile" guy talking about how he loved the album? It comes off as a blatent self-promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.139.88.168 (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Christgau's nonsensical review?[edit]

Why is his review posted on the site? His review consists of a symbol, illustrating that he thinks its some of the worst he's ever heard. Congratulations, you have written the worst, most shallow review I've ever read... Unless anyone argues why this uninformative, unfounded review should stay on, I'm deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.93.4.119 (talk) 19:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Reviews consist of words and not a fucking simbol. See, Allmusic review for death magnetic didn't stay till it had something written (b4 it was just 4 stars and nothing more). That isn't a review. 189.58.35.107 (talk) 19:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Christgau is the best music critic. Portillo (talk) 09:26, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

The "best music critic" should have something more insightful to say. Music is subjective anyway and there can't be a "best critic." It's much in the same manner that there can't be a "best singer" or "best player." UselessToRemain (talk) 17:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Christgau has made it abundantly clear that he despises virtually all forms of heavy metal. His views aren't objective, and therefore I've removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.242.68.34 (talk) 14:38, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Not to mention placing a negative review in an album article whose professional reviews section contains entirely positive reviews sort of disputes the neutrality. JRC3 (talk) 02:52, 35 March 2011 (UTC)

^ I'm removing it. If Christgau wants to make an informed opinion on the album that should be included. It is unacceptable as is because it literally says that he "said nothing" about the album. Readers of this article have not been briefed on whatever his "bomb" means. Furthermore, if Christgau has expressed his distaste for the genre, his reviews don't belong in the genre on Wikipedia because they are admittedly biased(not neutral to the subject). UselessToRemain (talk) 17:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Chronology[edit]

In the "Metallica Chronology" section, the next link is to "Live Shit", but I thought that only the studio albums were in the chronology section, with the links from one album to the next, but "Live Shit" only has a link to "S&M", and no link to "Load", I'm not sure if that is how it is supposed to be or not, but I just thought that maybe it should be pointed out....

so maybe either a link to Load should be made from Live Shit, or on from this album..... just a suggestion though...... and i'd do it, but i'm not smart enough..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.118.223.189 (talk) 04:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Fix the picture[edit]

Someone needs to fix the picture of the Album cover, it is just a black square.. Shouldn't it say Metallica or something? I was going to check the previous versions of the file but it seems they are missing now after the last person uploaded a new verion.. Anyone? --Ltshears (talk) 15:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I thought you should at least be able to see the snake and the word Metallica? I see nothing but solid black on my screen.. --Ltshears (talk) 15:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Personnel[edit]

I believe James Hetfield plays lead guitar on "My Friend of Misery" as well. If not, then the Article of James Hetfield has a fault —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hag07g114 (talkcontribs) 22:06, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

UK Singles Chart positions[edit]

As shown Here and again here, Enter Sandman only peaked at number 5, it never reached number two, as this article states (without a source), this article also contradicts the Wkipedia page for Metallica Discography and for The song itself, as a result, I am changing the peak from 5 to 2. I will also add references to the UK peaks of all the other singles (I've just checked, The Unforgiven is wrong aswell, it only peaked at No. 15 - as you can seehere and Here and sad but true peaked at number 20, not 25 http://www.everyhit.com/searchsec.php http://www.chartstats.com/songinfo.php?id=20589). Now it seems that Wherever I may Roam is wrong too (peaked at 25, not 12).

Sorry about the way that was written, but I only noticed these mistakes one at a time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.220.122 (talk) 19:26, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Fan Reaction[edit]

Why is there no section dealing with fan reaction? I do not feel that anyone can reasonably say that this album did not create a large number of alienated fans - given that it is such a large departure from the band's roots Beware of Gods who do not laugh (talk) 17:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Acoustic guitar[edit]

I wonder if we should add track 5 as one of the songs in which James Hetfield plays acoustic guitar. At the end of each verse of Wherever I may roam, there is an acoustic guitar, and we know James Hetfield played all rhythm tracks until Load. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fedryktulu (talkcontribs) 01:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

B-class?[edit]

Isn't this article b-class now? The assessment summary page states that all it needs to reach b-class is a full list of personnel, and a full list of personnel has been added. So isn't it a b-class article now? --Blaguymonkey (talk) 12:10, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I reassessed the article class ratings to B-class. And yes, it is currently B-class status. A\/\93r-(0la 04:50, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Metallica (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Petergriffin9901 (talk message contribs count logs email)

Fail - This article is being quick failed for obvious lack of preparation for GA.

  • Many unreliable sources; #s 7, 8, 30, 42
  • All are missing accessdates, and the ones that have them, are inconsistent
  • Many are in numerical form, while some appear 03-12-02 style
  • All sources are poorly and inconsistently formatted; many missing works/publishers/dates/authors etc.
  • Many MoS violations and poor and awkward paragraphing
  • Whats with the source for the credits? Make it encyclopedic.
  • Major lack of content; this is one of their most definitive albums, yet you have three major reviews? I could get more for a Kesha album
  • Very Bias article, struggling with NPOV issues; "Rolling Stone delivered a perfect 5-star review" -> we aren't fools, you don't need to tell us perfect
  • The tours section seems like a comulative piece of information regarding several tours and albums throughout the years. Nothing to the point or relevant
  • The lead is, forgive me, poor. Instead of failry summarizing the entire article's contents, it lists its commercial achievements and nothing more

I appreciate the effort, but this article is barely a C-class. Its in need of major clean-up and expansion. Good luck with that.--CallMeNathanTalk2Me 01:16, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Rick Rubin?[edit]

"Since they wanted the album's musical direction to be perfect,[12][19] Rubin exhorted the band to record additional takes..."

A case of confusing Rubin with Rock perhaps? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noonand (talkcontribs) 14:21, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Sourcing in Personnel section[edit]

Not everything in the Personnel section needs to be referenced. Everybody knows that Hetfield sings and plays rhythm guitar, everybody knows that Ulrich plays drums, everybody knows that Hammett plays lead guitar and everybody knows that Newsted plays bass. If you going to do that, you might as well reference that the band's name is Metallica or source the member's names. And you do not need to put [citation needed] next to everything. That gets very obnoxious after a while. --BLAguyMONKEY! (talk) 03:24, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Singles from Metallica[edit]

Singles from Metallica

  1. Enter Sandman (released on July 29, 1991)
  2. The Unforgiven (released on October 28, 1991)
  3. Nothing Else Matters (released on April 20, 1992)
  4. Wherever I May Roam (released on October 19, 1992)
  5. Sad But True (released on February 8, 1993)

"Don't Tread on Me" is not a single. --SuperVirtual (talk) 12:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

"Don't Tread on Me" is a single. It was released as a single and it says on the "Don't Tread on Me" wikipedia page it lists it as a single — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.171.41 (talk) 16:26, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

"Don't Tread on Me" was a promo single. - The1337gamer (talk) 16:28, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

and a single nonetheless? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.171.41 (talk) 16:37, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Newest correction[edit]

I don't think the Nielsen Soundscan reference is necessary next to the total US sales because Chart Watch gives us the precise number.--31.12.31.62 (talk) 07:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I reverted your removal because the Chart Watch source you mention is actually listed as a blog on Yahoo, and blogs are generally not reliable sources. However, I did not remove it, as the blog at least looks of a high standard (more or less professional). Just isn't suitable to be the ONLY citation though, in my opinion.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 12:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I just noticed that BOTH citations in question are actually for the same blog (but different pages on that blog). I have tagged them as questionable.--L1A1 FAL (talk) 12:25, 6 October 2012 (UTC)