Talk:Death Magnetic/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Proposed deletion

I deleted the proposed deletion for the following reasons:

Future albums are not considered "crystal balling"
Metallica has stated on their official site they are recording their next album
Rick Rubin has said he is producing it
Metallica has played the two new songs on tour, and they are rumored to be on the album

I understand your concerns, but this is a clear-cut case of an expected and future album that will be released. Anthony Hit me up... 01:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I propose removing the bit that states only 10 songs will be on the new album because, i think whats being implied, is that it wont fit on the cd? And the reference to this says nothing but: "-- The band hit the studio "with 26 songs," then "went down to 14 with Rick [Rubin, producer]" and recorded 11. Only 10 songs will make the final tracklisting.". What part of this tells you they dropped a song because it wouldn't fit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.27.210.253 (talk) 14:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? The article doesn't say they dropped a song because it wouldn't fit, it says they had 26 songs, cut that number down to 14, and the final pressing of the album contains 10 tracks. If you look in the Media impressions section, it even says how reviewers have heard select songs from Death Magnetic, or more precisely, they claim to have heard "six out of the album's ten tracks." So, you still propose removing the bit that states only 10 songs will be on the album? Lol. Vixen Windstorm (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

TIME!!!!!!!

it says "the fall of 2008" . Its the fall of 2008 and no news!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.16.160.17 (talk) 20:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe it is spring, at least in the north hemisphere. -- Kl4m ^{T C} 22:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

September 22nd seems to have been confirmed, although it might vary from country to country. --Skehrkrow (talk) 20:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thrash Metal?

Why is the genre of Metallica's new album listed as thrash metal? If so, those new songs they've debuted are quite literally the softest thrash songs ever. I even remember Lars claiming that St. Anger would sound like Obituary, and that was obviously not the case. If someone could post some verifiable proof that this album will be thrash, please do, though most sensible metalheads will assume not and leave this band in the dust.

Bob Rock/...And Justice For All

I don't know who keeps changing the sentence about this being the first album since . . . And Justice For All to not be produced by Bob Rock, but it is inaccurate. Justice was produced by Fleming Rasmussen, and there is absolutely no mention of Rock anywhere in the liner notes.

The first album that Rock produced was the Black Album in 1991.

That's the point. The last album not produced by Rock was And Justice, therefore making this one the first album NOT produced by Rock since Justice. The grammar is correct. Anthony Hit me up... 16:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

And whoever edited this page wrote the wrong date for ...And Justice for All. It was released in 1988 not in my year, which is 1989. Alex 22:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Enough of this. I just reworded that whole thing so that there is no dispute. J-Dog 19:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Tenth

This is metallica tenth stuido album!

Is it...? Name 'em. Or I will. 1-Kill Em All, 2-Lightning, 3-Puppets, 4-Justice, 5-Black Album, 6-Load, 7-ReLoad, 8-St Anger, then 9-the new one. That's it; those are the only studio albums. Live albums and cover albums do not count as studio albums. If you disagree, go read what defines a studio album. Let's not have an editing war over this either. It's number nine, period. J-Dog 21:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Then why does is say "St. Anger is the ninth studio album by American thrash metal band Metallica" on the St.Anger page? Edit this page or the St. Anger one. 213.114.217.188 09:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Garage inc is probably included in the count

Garage Inc. is covers/compilation, shouldn't be included. Adamravenscroft 16:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

They may be covers, but its still a studio album. 143.92.1.33 03:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at what DEFINES a studio album, and you'll see that covers do NOT count, because they are NOT original new material. I quote: A studio album is a collection of previously unreleased, studio-recorded tracks by a recording artist. It usually does not contain live recordings or remixes, and if it does, those tracks do not make up a majority of the album and are often called "bonus tracks".-studio album 68.37.167.19 01:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe Garage Inc. falls under this definition of a studio album. The included "Garage Days Revisited" disc could/should be considered a "bonus" disc, but disc 1 only contains tracks that were recorded in a studio and which had never been released previously. I think the "previously unreleased" portion of the definition is meant to exclude "best of" albums, for instance (where the exact same recordings had been released previously). While the lyrics and basic melodies of the songs on Garage Inc. had been released previously by other bands, the tracks on Garage Inc. are original, never-before-released, studio recordings. Super_C 21:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

What about S&M? Maybe the St. Anger page counted it. I don't know. This is the ninth studio album, though. Powerslave (talk-contribs) 22:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, S&M would be excluded according to the definition of "studio album" cited by 68.37.167.19 above (because it's live). But, in my opinion, Garage Inc. should be considered a studio album (my reasons are in my last post, above), which would make the new, upcoming album studio album #10. Super_C 22:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Metallica call it their ninth original here and St. Anger the 8th studio here. Adamravenscroft 09:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, there you go; can't argue with that. Thanks Adamravenscroft! Super_C 15:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Amen!--OgreCorps 20:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Eesh, in the recent interview with krone.at, Hammett refers to the album as their eleventh studio album. How could that be?? R-Tiztik 17:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

As quoted on the article itself: "Kirk Hammett: Yeah, it’s our eleventh studio album, but it feels like our sixth." This page is one big contradiction.

Kirk is obviusly counting Garage Days and Garage Inc so its

1.Kill em all 2.Ride 3.Master 4. Garage Days 5. Justice 6.Black 7. Load 8. Reload 9.Garage Inc 10.St Anger 11.New Album. so by saying it feels like their sixth... he means its a worthy sequel to Justice!!? Fuck Yeah I'll have a bit of that, if its anything like the power four tallica albums... Hoooollllleeeee fuuuck! Music could be coaxed back to the way it shoulda stayed! Thrash!! 80s!!!! Metallica!!!!!

I believe they can do it like I really do.--Dimedude 16:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Even the two "New Songs" were a bit of an ease on the uncertainties of this album; especially "The New Song". "The Other New Song" was good too, but it didn't have nearly as much of an impression as the former, personally. It's a shame that these songs won't appear on the album in their entireties. Maybe they were recorded in their entirety as demos and will be iTunes bonus tracks or something, now that the band has licensed their music for sale on iTunes. R-Tiztik 17:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Jewel Case - Blank Album Art Graphic

The blank jewel case indicating that we don't have album art, yet, looks awfully dated. Perhaps I have a bias against jewel cases, but I'm thinking a minimalist square with the same text might work better.

I dunno, it's not that bad. It's really just a placeholder, and not about dating and such. R-Tiztik 20:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Quotes galore

I was here two days or so ago and there were three quotes. Now we have quite a few, and instead of one unsourced, we've got several. I'm looking around to see what I can find on some of these quotes, and if anyone could help it would be much appreciated. I think that currently it looks as if we've got some made up quotes from the band about the new album. That may just be my take, but yeah. -Motleh 02:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It looks very messy to say the least, and the part about the two songs being cut was removed... hmmm

I read them all, and they seem legit based on what I've heard from Metallica over the past few years. I think it looks good! -Winter123 06:20, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it looked very messy. I've gone through the page and reformatted quotes to a more neutral Wikipedia approach, and added a category for the sound of the album from what has been revealed so far. I think it looks much better this way too. R-Tiztik 07:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Speculation

I deleted the bit about possibly using leftover tracks from this album as a 10th album (a la Reload) because it was pure speculation, backed up by nothing, and oh, just, no. Wangoed 08:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I also deleted the "Not Dead" speculation, because it is just that. Wangoed 18:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The Release

It says on Kerrang!s site that the new album will be released April 2007. ([1])

It says it's tentatively due for April, that doesn't mean it's coming out in April for certain. Funeral 22:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Tour section

Why is there so much detail on tours in this article? I don't see how this is relevant to the album itself and should be mentioned on the Metallica page if necessary, not not here. Rehevkor (talk) 22:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Release dates

I noticed that the opening sentence of the article had been altered to show that the album "will" be released in September.

Until we have something *concrete* the article should keep referring to the third fiscal quarter. As soon as we have a verifiable date, we can change it - but until then, let's keep to what we do know now. Onesecondglance (talk) 07:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

http://www.93x.com/blog.asp?id=703221&sbid=4444 "Additionally, drummer Lars Ulrich announced that the band will follow the September release of its as-yet-untitled album with a tour in October." - ain't that *concrete* enough? —Preceding unsigned comment added by VZakharov (talk • contribs) 20:56, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

well, now it's sourced, it is. it wasn't before. Onesecondglance (talk) 07:55, 16 May 2008

(UTC)

We know that Metallica's ninth studio album will be released in Fall 2008- the only thing that is not clear is the release date. Despite what Lars Ulrich says about September. I don't believe him. I heard the same thing said about March 6, 2007 and the date passed with no Guns N' Roses album. Amazon.com has a notice where you can sign up to be notified when the album is going to be released. I don't believe that the release date is September and none of the magazines have a release date. There was no mention of Metallica's new album in Billboard magazine's summer preview- which included September. My guess is that the album is TBA. - JASON HUTTON

Yeah, that's a really good point. If Billboard doesn't have it listed, then that's saying something about the definity of the release date. I say change the "will" to "probably" just in case. It'd be great if you could provide a source for that Billboard magazine though. --Hippie Metalhead (talk) 20:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

"The Missing Link" part that needs a source

Here's a source but I'm not sure if it's reliable.. is it?http://metxxxpage.com/blog/2007/07/11/kirk-hammett-interview-on-the-new-metallica-record/

RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Link it to the video and the blog, it's first hand and second hand evidence Thedarxide (talk) 16:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

?

RandySavageFTW (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

A little vague on the sound

"The snippets heard so far suggest the album is heavy and fast." Heavy and fast in comparison to what? Their load and Reaload stuff? St. Anger? Is it thrash heavy and fast? Can I remove that line? JackorKnave (talk) 11:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

This Articla is FUCKING HUGE

I know how much of a big deal this album is, especially considering their statement of going back to their roots, but is it really neccessary to chronicle absolutely every incident interview in regards to the album? I'm not questioning relevancy, but there seems to a bit too much info here for an album that isn't out yet. If I was a casual reader, I couldn't see myself reading everything on the article.JackorKnave (talk) 12:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The casual reader statement applies to almost every article on Wikipedia... What's wrong with details? If you don't want many details, there's a much shorter version on the Metallica article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.254.25.187 (talk) 23:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

What's an "articla?" Or are you trying to be cute? This is Wikipedia, not the Metallica fan club. The more detail, the better. That's the way that it works. J-Dog (talk) 14:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

i would have thought that "articla" was a typo, and nothing more. but yes, i think the length of the article is fine as is, no need to trim - this can be done when it's finally released.Onesecondglance (talk) 07:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

To NdPhil121: Thank you for pointing out my typo and your masterful assumption of my attempt to be.. cute?. Anyway, I've fixed it. Also, I would almost assume this IS the Metallica fanclub from the insane amount of quotes from the band, and even people who have little to do with the band. I've seen other future album pages and they are dwarfed by comparison (the new Wintersun album, for example. There are plenty of lengthy updates by the band, which could be frequently quoted), but all the neccassary info on the page is summed up). I'm not saying remove the information, but I allways thought quotes on wikipedia tend to rejected in favour of summaries with sources. Isn't there some legal stuff as well, in regards to quotes? Not sure about that one though. To Onesecondglace: Sorry, I assumed it would be trimmed down, but I still don't see why most of this information are just quotes. Forget it anyway, you probably know wikipedia better than me anyway.JackorKnave (talk) 23:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Album Title

Why are you still calling this page "Metallica's ninth studio album"? It is confirmed that the album will be called "Vulturus". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.1.83.249 (talk) 13:12, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so where's the source? That's right. Vixen Windstorm (talk) 14:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

When in New York on Wednesday I went by a store that had a huge banner advert in the window for the album, and it had a title. But I can't for the life of me remember what it was. Canterbury Tail talk 12:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Did you spray paint "^{[citation needed]}" on it? :P Rehevkor (talk) 13:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

K? I'm not claiming to know the title, just that there was a huge banner for it and I didn't pay it too much head as I was in a hurry. Canterbury Tail talk 20:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I've amended my comment to highlight it's original tongue in cheek format. Rehevkor (talk) 20:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The "Mission Metallica" official fanclub site is slowly revealing what may be letters in the album title (as of 12 June 2008, they are D, E, I and C). Sources for the "teaser" images (which are being posted on the front page of Mission Metallica): [2] and [3]69.255.249.205 (talk) 05:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The title for this article needs to be changed. The album is "Death Magnetic" not "Death Magnet". Visit missionmetallica or look at the cover picture.

where does it say Death Magnet? Onesecondglance (talk) 08:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Listening party?

just rechecked the link for the supposed first listen (quietus.com) and it's dead?

unless we can find a new source we're going to have to delete that section, as it's unsourced comment. Onesecondglance (talk) 07:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I've made some research and I found that Metallica's management told quietus.com and other website who covered the listening party to take down anything related to the new album. This can be confirmed here : http://www.comcast.net/music/blindedbythehype/1462/metallicaalbumpreviewcoverup/

also, if you go to quietus.com again, there are brief mentions of the listening party (vague mentions, however, so that metallica's management won't get mad). this can be confirmed here : http://www.thequietus.com/2008/06/metallica-from-rocks-back-pages/

in other words, the Media Impressions section may be correct based on what quietus.com had on its website prior to metallica's management telling the website to remove the news. Dautolover (talk) 23:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Blabbermouth talks about the listening party as well : http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/BlabberMouth.Net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=98355 Dautolover (talk) 23:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Well the album title is basically out now according to the Mission Metallica trailer. Except now the problem is that since a Death Magnetic page was created as a redirect to this article, this article can't be moved properly without an administrator's assistance, since it wouldn't retain its history if it were copypasted to the Death Magnetic page. The Metallica wallpaper for the album's title wasn't enough to source, but with the title also being featured in the album trailer, how much more convincing is required before taking the action to Requested moves? Vixen Windstorm (talk) 00:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Kay sweet, we got the page moved properly. Vixen Windstorm (talk) 01:41, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

No Confirmation

Yes, we do know that SOMETHING released by Metallica in September will be called "Death Magnetic," but we have no official confirmation that this is an album title, single title, tour name, or what. It's premature and unwarranted to assume that the album title is DM without indisputable word from the band. --69.91.91.205 (talk) 14:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC) cpieper@earthlink.net Chris Pieper

For days they've been revealing letters of the album title. The title now appears to be "Death Magnetic", and the image is accompanied by a post title reading "??? No More." Furthermore, the title as the letters amounted to yesterday appear in the album trailer, reading "Death Magnetic" followed by "September." If the band has been revealing the album title, culminating with a post like "??? No More," and that very title from that update is featured in a trailer for that album, do you really think it's likely that the band would instantly decide not to reveal the album title, not tell anybody, and reveal the name of a song or tour? Hmmm, seems a little (very) far fetched to me. Vixen Windstorm (talk) 17:50, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Um, dude... Go to Metallica's website, click on "In the press" and EVERYBODY is saying that they named their new album, I think Metallica would say something about it not being their new album. Plus they said that they were aiming for their album to be released in September.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.215.167.157 (talk) 03:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hell and Back or Hallenbach?

Alright, we've all seen the drumming video with the click-track and whatnot. But does Lars call the track 'Hell and Back' or 'Hallenbach'? I thought it was Hell and Back, and I thought it was just his accent. But is there any way to get a confirmation?Centurion Ry (talk) 11:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

"Hell and Back" is plain english so we should assume it to be that until there's a reliable source for the, quite frankly, nonsensical "Hallenbach". Rehevkor ✉ 12:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

i thought it was meant to be "Hellenbach", not "Hallenbach". not that that makes any more sense, though. Onesecondglance (talk) 12:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Guys, 'Hellenbach' could be a reference to a guy named Baron Lazar De Baczolay Hellenbach. He has some theories on birth and death, I copied the following from a web page - "Hungarian philosopher whose numerous important works, including Birth and Death and The Philosophy of Sound Common Sense closely concern psychical research. In Birth and Death, which was translated into English in 1886, Hellenbach proposes the original idea that no change of world occurs at the moment of birth and death, except in the method of perception. In The Philosophy of Sound Common Sense, published in 1876, he tells the story of his psychical investigations." In keeping with the title and seeming theme of this album, I wouldn't dismiss 'Hellenbach' as the songs title.

I've no idea how to properly sign this, I just thought I'd point this out. Anyway, Stuart Fitzpatrick, Dundee, UK. 04:12am GMT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.167.220 (talk) 03:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Hellenbach is the name of a NWOBHM band. Lars is a junkie for NWOBHM, so it would make sense if that were indeed the title.

I am pretty sure it is "Hellenbach" not "Hell and Back for two reasons: 1) although Lars still has a funny danish accent from time to time, he clearly said "bach" not "back", he would know how to pronounce it correctly. 2) Metallica said in interviews that most songs / riff ideas were named after the city / place where they were written (don't ask em about Pink Flamingo though), which would strongly suggest Hellenbach as being correct. I am not going to change it in the article until we have a consensus, but I am strongly in favor of changing it to "Hellenbach". --Skehrkrow (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Dream Theater Drummer talks about Death Magnetic

Hello, Im a Noob at this editing thing but i just found out about Dream Theater drummer hoping that Metallica makes a good album. If one of the more senior editors would like to post this in the main article i leave the link of the interview, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XNVJnWDyZE . Thanks! Omarnirv (talk) 05:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

can someone please remove...

the bottom comment about the 2008 demo because its false its a actaully a rearanged album by a band called eternal decision and due to the sound of metallica and ED, ED are often mistaken for rare metallica recordings. the tracklist isnt real altho the demo is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_Decision - look on trivia the songs on the demo are from Eternal Decisions first album they have been renamed two songs are missing and they have been rearanged none of the current song titles that metallica have discussed are anything like those of the 2008 demo --86.130.87.79 (talk) 19:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I reverted this myself as it as clearly rubbish. Rehevkor ✉ 02:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Sources for the release date

Can you please put the source for the release date (17 September)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.1.80.3 (talk) 13:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

http://ultimate-guitar.com/news/upcoming_releases/metallica_death_magnetic_box_set.html is where I found the realease date. It is also on the Death Magnetic page. --Bryan 13:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metallicafan1bryan (talk • contribs)

Pre Order

I fell stupid asking this and has little to do with the album but is there a store you can pre order albums at like walmart, kmart, etc; becuase I cant order things on the internet --Bryan 14:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Brian, Im not tottaly sure but you might want to check at maybe Best Buy. Do not go to Wal-Mart because if you go to Wal-Mart you will get an edited copy (Wal-Mart Policy I guess) And to tell you the truth if your going to go to a store the buy the album you really dont have to pre-order the album, once we get an offical release date on the album you can just walk into the store (Thats what im doing) I dobut that the people that have or are going to pre-order the album are going to get it early and even if they do it wont be much eariler (My guess if they do get it early at all it will only be about a day or two)

So I hope I could help but im probley already telling you things you alredy know but anyways . . also you might want to check at Target,You never know what places might pre-order it after all Death Magnetic is going to be a Big Album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt1758 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

mission metallica website is down

Today July 8th, it seams that the www.missionmetallica.com website is down, so far nor me or anyother of my friends could log in to the page. I think it should be added to the article though.... (Omarnirv (talk) 16:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC))

FALSE ALARM! the website is ok now! :D Omarnirv (talk) 16:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Regardless, the website being down isn't even notable. Vixen Windstorm (talk) 15:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, that is fucking stupid. 86.144.167.220 (talk) 09:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)