Why 1996 was such a good year for Metallica...
Oct 7, 2021 16:32:09 GMT
yepsure, jayc, and 1 more like this
Post by Habuji on Oct 7, 2021 16:32:09 GMT
It appears that this forum is very dead. It's literally only the same 5 or 6 people I ever see post on here.
This will most likely be the last post I make here, and what better way to finish off than to talk about the very first topic I discussed on this site. Metallica in 1996 and why it was such a good year, primarily for James. If yep-sure is still around I bet he's gonna have a blast reading through this, seeing as he always loved how I talked about the Load era and Jason Newsted. Not ever thinking about starting an argument saying how the band was better in the 80s and now with Rob. Okay, I take full responsibility for some of the cringe troll posts I've made on this site. But hey, we were all young once, and I was always serious when saying the Load era was underrated.
When I think of peak Metallica, and the classic (or best) James voice. I don't think the 80s, or 1991, 1992, or even 1999. I literally think 1996 and sometimes 1997 (if only James didn't stop using screaming there but 1998 is his 1997 voice with harsh vocals incorporated) and I'll now go on to tell you why. The band had recharged their batteries, seeming more laidback during this period. This allowed there to be more of a "beer party" type vibe, overall a really carefree and "manly" atmosphere (even if Kirk was wearing makeup) like you would notice James changing his singing style along with the band tuning down.
This is basically James at his most James. Drunk half the time, not giving a fuck, and just blasting and barking his way through every song. He was still very capable of doing the 80s thrashers justice. While the others looked like they had sold their soul, James (and Jason to an extent) kept it real and was just being himself. He seems comfortable keeping his hair short ever since. However, this was also the year where James realized he could not scream his way through every song anymore if he wants to keep his voice, so going into 1997 he started doing that less and instead gave us a more melodic performance that's more like what we have today.
The other band members were also on fire. They were having fun, and there was more a "I don't give a fuck what you think" attitude than ever before. Lars was rarely off beat during this time, and Kirk always seems to nail his solos (except for that embarrassing Unforgiven 2 Live moment) as well as Jason's backing vocals sounding as wicked as ever while shredding away at his bass. It really feels as if the band lost its nutsack since losing Jason. That's just my opinion about it.
I think 1996 actually had potential for them to go back to their roots and make another great thrash record which they failed so miserably to do in 2008 IMO with Death Magnetic. Sounding dull, forced, and worn out as opposed to how lively it would have sounded in 1996. HTSD was alright, but seeing how great this year had been it makes me wonder how a thrash record would have sounded during that time.
Any thoughts on the matter?
This will most likely be the last post I make here, and what better way to finish off than to talk about the very first topic I discussed on this site. Metallica in 1996 and why it was such a good year, primarily for James. If yep-sure is still around I bet he's gonna have a blast reading through this, seeing as he always loved how I talked about the Load era and Jason Newsted. Not ever thinking about starting an argument saying how the band was better in the 80s and now with Rob. Okay, I take full responsibility for some of the cringe troll posts I've made on this site. But hey, we were all young once, and I was always serious when saying the Load era was underrated.
When I think of peak Metallica, and the classic (or best) James voice. I don't think the 80s, or 1991, 1992, or even 1999. I literally think 1996 and sometimes 1997 (if only James didn't stop using screaming there but 1998 is his 1997 voice with harsh vocals incorporated) and I'll now go on to tell you why. The band had recharged their batteries, seeming more laidback during this period. This allowed there to be more of a "beer party" type vibe, overall a really carefree and "manly" atmosphere (even if Kirk was wearing makeup) like you would notice James changing his singing style along with the band tuning down.
This is basically James at his most James. Drunk half the time, not giving a fuck, and just blasting and barking his way through every song. He was still very capable of doing the 80s thrashers justice. While the others looked like they had sold their soul, James (and Jason to an extent) kept it real and was just being himself. He seems comfortable keeping his hair short ever since. However, this was also the year where James realized he could not scream his way through every song anymore if he wants to keep his voice, so going into 1997 he started doing that less and instead gave us a more melodic performance that's more like what we have today.
The other band members were also on fire. They were having fun, and there was more a "I don't give a fuck what you think" attitude than ever before. Lars was rarely off beat during this time, and Kirk always seems to nail his solos (except for that embarrassing Unforgiven 2 Live moment) as well as Jason's backing vocals sounding as wicked as ever while shredding away at his bass. It really feels as if the band lost its nutsack since losing Jason. That's just my opinion about it.
I think 1996 actually had potential for them to go back to their roots and make another great thrash record which they failed so miserably to do in 2008 IMO with Death Magnetic. Sounding dull, forced, and worn out as opposed to how lively it would have sounded in 1996. HTSD was alright, but seeing how great this year had been it makes me wonder how a thrash record would have sounded during that time.
Any thoughts on the matter?
