How would you rank these thrash bands from lightest to heaviest?
šRankingšWould say metallica & anthrax lightest
imo megadeth before metallica, it depends on which albums you look at
Metallica's softest softer than megs softest
Metallicaās softest was hard rock
Megadethās softest was disco-pop
What the fuck I need to check it out
They're talking about Risk.
Risk aint disco pop, it's just rock
If they're not talking about Risk, then idk what they could be referring to
they probably were since theres no lighter album other risk, but calling it disco pop it's straight up incorrect, plus risk is a good album
I agree. Risk is a good album. It just gets shit on for being the black sheep of Megadeth's catalog
One song does not an album make, besides that's a mischaracterization. Not much disco pop as nhl themes. Load/LuLu not even hard rock
Load, Lulu, Reload, and St. Anger, are still heavier than Cryptic Writings, Risk, and Super Collider
At that point, Megadeth was teetering on the corniness of bands like Nickelbackā¦ and I enjoy Nickelback
Back to the point, āInsomniaā is definitely disco-pop, and the rest of the album is sprinkled with it. āBreadlineā is mediocre radio rock, and āCrush āEmā is a poor attempt at a NHL anthem. āPrince Of Darknessā isnāt horrible, but itās not enough to save the album
At least Metallica were consistent with the songs in those albums I listed. They all had the same energy and quality throughout
None of those metallica albums you mentioned are heavy in the slightest lol with the exception of st anger which is a nu metal self-parody. Def heavy tracks on those megs albums despite being more commercial & admittedly overall weaker. When you say "at that point" that doesn't make sense as those albums were spread over 15 years with others in between. Crush Em isn't a "poor attempt" at an NHL anthem, it literally was but super edgy to criticize an album in Risk which no one ever has before. In no way was metallica consistent in their discography, even in the albums you chose. We've had this conversation before, it went nowhere, & I've said all I want to say to you. Have a good one
In no way was metallica consistent in their discography, even in the albums you chose.
That's not what I said. I said that the songs in Load, Reload, or St. Anger were consistent throughout, either consistently garbage or consistent in the genre. Risk and Cryptic Writings can't commit to one style, they're just scrambled compilations of half-baked ideas
Crush Em isn't a "poor attempt" at an NHL anthem, it literally was but super edgy to criticize an album in Risk which no one ever has before.
Bro, what are you talking about? "Crush 'Em" was most definitely a poor attempt to make an NHL-themed song for use by the league. And since when is it edgy to criticize Risk? I'm calling out an album for being shit, it's pretty standard to do
When you say "at that point" that doesn't make sense as those albums were spread over 15 years with others in between.
That makes no sense. Did Cryptic Writings and Risk not come out in the '90s along with Load and Reload? Did Super Collider and Lulu not come out in the early 2010s? They are mirrors of each other in their respective decades. I'm using Load as an example, despite my adoration for that album, as it was a seismic shift in Metallica's style. It is much heavier than Risk, and I can safely say that after listening to both albums.
Why is it so hard for Megadeth fans to accept that they made soft rock at some points in their career? LOL call a spade a spade, not everything they made was awesome. Hell... St. Anger was heavier than those Megadeth albums I keep mentioning, and St. Anger is hot garbage