Calling out Loudersound and their Metallica album ranking

I get a kick out of doing these posts. Today I'm looking at Loudersound's ranking of Metallica's studio discography.

Original article: https://www.loudersound.com/features/metallicas-albums-ranked-worst-to-best

11. ST. ANGER (2003)
What they say:

"Is it predictable that St. Anger is rock bottom of another list like this? Yup. Is it still justified? Sadly, still yup. Metallica's most hated album is far from the complete write-off many would have you believe; 'Frantic' and the title track still go hard, songs like 'Invisible Kid' and cult fan fave 'Dirty Window' could have been world class with more work and the countrified re-dub of 'All Within My Hands' the band have experimented with in recent years shows there's a decent little song hiding under there. Of course, none of that can cover for compositions that feel messy and disjointed and one of the most infamously disastrous production jobs in metal history. Artistically, St. Anger is an interesting chapter in Metallica's career at least: a raw, ugly cry from a band on the edge. Musically? This just ain't it, no matter how you try to paint it."

What I say:

I agree with a lot of this entry. St. Anger is definitely the worst Metallica album if we're not counting the Lou Reed collaboration project, Lulu (which we're not). But I'm kind of glad the authors, (Merlin Alderslade and Rich Hobson), also mentioned the fact it's not as terrible as the average metalhead claims it to be. It's one of those records that seems to make more sense to me as time passes by. It'll always be bottom-of-the-barrel Metallica, sure, but there's still some positives to be taken away from this record. Like the authors say, many of these tracks do indeed "go hard" because St. Anger is undoubtedly a legitimately heavy album. There's many riffs scattered throughout songs like 'Frantic', 'My World', ' Some Kind of Monster', 'Dirty Window' etc. that will totally kick your ass, and I actually like James' angrier-than-usual approach to his vocals on the record. I also stated in my own review that I admire the fact the band even dared to record an album like this at that stage of their career; they had massive mainstream appeal and success throughout the '90s, then they release this heavy, grimy, garage metal kind of record with zero radio-friendly tracks whatsoever. It's a product of the state the band were in at the time of course, but still - there was no way the biggest critics were ever gonna be completely on board with it.

That said, even if I do like St. Anger more than the average listener, there's aspects of it that do suck. It has a reputation for a reason. I can deal with a lot of the production's different angles, but Lars' drum snare sound will always be terrible. It sounds like he's clanging pots and pans on every song! Also, I get that the boys were going for a stripped-back garage band kind of sound here, but a lot of these tracks are far too long for their own good. Expect a lot of repetition, and for the first time ever, there's almost no guitar melodies/solos to speak of!! Did Kirk Hammett have anything to do with the recording of the album?! The lyrics can be cringey in an edgy teenager kind of way, and even if I can tolerate the album myself, it's hard to win the haters over and get them on my side... because I can't really argue with anyone for not liking St. Anger!

10. RELOAD (1997)

What they say:

"When Reload hits the mark, it does so in style. 'Fuel' might be basic as hell, but it remains a wonderfully simply, full-throttle burst of heavy metal adrenaline; 'The Memory Remains' packs not just one but two of Metallica's most earwormy moments (both its iconic chorus and Marianne Faithfull's "Da da da daaa da, da daaaa" refrain); 'The Unforgiven II' is a more than worthy sequel to its predecessor and an outstanding power ballad in its own right. That all said, Metallica's confidence in their leftover material at this time was just a tad too optimistic, because Load's sequel is packing way too much filler. James Hetfield's wonderful lyrical streak was at least still in full flow, but even he wasn't enough to save Reload from feeling largely unnecessary."

What I say:

I agree with the placement within the ranking, I just don't agree with some of the details. I was never a 'Memory Remains' fan, as I find it cheesy and Marianne Faithfull's contribution just sounds old and cranky to me. And honestly, I don't care for 'The Unforgiven II' either - it's one of my least favourite tracks on the album. I'll back him up and say that 'Fuel' is great for the same reasons though, and kinda timeless. 

While there is filler here, I don't think there's as much filler as the authors' claims. And while I do think Load is the superior album, I reckon the band had every right to be confident enough to release Reload as the standalone record it is. It's a good album. Not great, but good. How can you not talk about the outstandingly atmospheric acoustic ballad 'Low Man's Lyric'?! Or how about the fun up-tempo rocker 'Prince Charming'? Oh, and 'Devil's Dance' is cool too, with lots of groove. I guess I'm a little confused as to whether or not Loudersound actually genuinely like this album or not. I re-reviewed it a couple of years back and gave it a solid 7/10. That still sounds about right to me.

9. DEATH MAGNETIC (2008)

What they say:

"Critics were delighted with Metallica's return to more traditional heavy metal fare (and solos!) when Death Magnetic arrived five years after the spectacular misfire of St. Anger. In the cold light of day, it's undoubtedly superior to its predecessor, featuring some full-on metal bangers ('That Was Just Your Life', 'Cyanide') and two genuinely great power ballads in 'The Day That Never Comes' and the severely underrated 'The Unforgiven III'. Unfortunately, Death Magnetic as a whole is held back by two pressing issues. Firstly, while a clear improvement on St. Anger, the production is really poor, Lars' drums still sounding like they were recorded using kitchen utensils. Secondly, and not for the first or last time, many of the songs just go too long. 'The End of the Line', 'All Nightmare Long' and 'The Judas Kiss' are all solid tracks pulled down by meandering riff repetition, while forgettable instrumental 'Suicide & Redemption' feels particularly self-indulgent at a whopping ten minutes. Decent, but far from a classic."

What I say:

Ahh, now I have more disagreements to make here! While I'll take 'The Unforgiven III' over 'II', it isn't talked about because nobody asked for it in the first place. Also, how can you say that the songs on Death Magnetic are too long yet say nothing about St. Anger's repetition and overblown song lengths?! I find DM's songwriting is usually on-point and the lengthy tracks are justified because they're really good. I definitely disagree with the statement about 'The End of the Line', 'All Nightmare Long' and 'The Judas Kiss' being "pulled down by meandering riff repetition". Maybe to the average pop fan they're long and meandering, but there's a lot going on musically in all these tracks, and Hetfield's riffing is arguably the most creative since ...And Justice for All.

That said, I do agree with the botched production mention. I honestly feel that hiring that overpaid clown of a producer Rick Rubin in the 21st century is entirely pointless. He did Slayer good in the '80s, sure, but I just don't think his compressed sonic style does rock and metal justice anymore. I can't speak for all the stuff he does within other genres, but he should stay the hell away from heavy metal these days. Death Magnetic sounds flat - still far better than St. Anger, but the album would be a bona fide Metallica classic had it been produced differently. Still, I think this is a great record and aside from 'Unforgiven III' and 'Suicide & Redemption', is the band's best set of songs since the Black Album.

8. HARDWIRED... TO SELF-DESTRUCT (2016)

What they say:

"Hardwired... to Self-Destruct was both a refreshing reminder of Metallica's ability to pen top-tier metal hits and frustrating further evidence of the problems that come with their now trademark lack of self-restraint. The first half of the record in particular is filled with killer material, from the groovy, Load-ish power of 'Now That We're Dead' and epic, anthemic closing moments of 'Halo on Fire'. The second half, however, is a big letdown, the likes of 'Confusion', 'Am I Savage?', 'ManUNkind' and 'Murder One' largely plodding and toothless (a particular shame given the latter's status as a tribute to the legendary Lemmy Kilmister). Luckily, 'Spit Out the Bone' turns up right at the end to finish things on a big high. What a rager."

What I say:

Their double album, and the authors are 100% correct when they state the first half is far stronger than the second. Of the 12 tracks across both halves, the first 6 are all superb. They range from short and sweet ('Hardwired'), proggy and melodic ('Atlas Rise!', one of my all-time favourite 'Tallica tunes), plus catchy and groovy ('Dream No More'). And the production is a definite improvement over Rubin's shoddy workmanship with Death Magnetic. Shame then, that the cracks do show on the second disc. Agreed that 'Spit Out the Bone' is a total cracker, but 'ManUNkind' is in my opinion, one of the better tracks on the album - so I can't agree with that part of the article. It's not that disc 2 is a letdown, it's just overshadowed by the tremendous first half of the record. Musically, the whole record is relatively similar to that of Death Magnetic, but I think the former is more refined overall and as a result, the better album of the 2.

7. 72 SEASONS (2023)

What they say:

"For the third time in a row, Metallica put out an album that was solid as hell and packing plenty of great moments, but a bit bogged down by a lack of incisive editing and at least a couple of tracks that just didn't quite measure up. What can't be in any doubt, however, is that 72 Seasons is the best-sounding Metallica album in over 25 years, the likes of its rollocking title track, the triumphant 'Lux AEterna' and majestic album closer 'Inamorata' sounding truly stadium-sized under the bedded-in fingers of Greg Fidelman. Papa Het's voice also has no right sounding this good this far into his career, the band's talismanic frontman bellowing like a vengeful mountain god during the pounding 'If Darkness Had a Son'. A couple of minutes snipped off here and there and a little more ambition on the musical side of things and this could have been special. As it is, 72 Seasons is still pretty damn decent."

What I say:

Yes, this is definitely the best Metallica album of the more recent ones. And yes, 72 Seasons contains Hetfield's best vocal performance in years. He also mentions that a few minutes could have been shaved off the final product - yeah, he's probably right in some ways. The authors are giving this record plenty of praise then, but I think I hold it in higher regard. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the production (it's superb), but honestly I think it sounds pretty damn similar to Hardwired overall - and that's just fine with me. I find it surprising that he didn't mention Hardwired's rock-solid production now that I think about it. Whatever! The songs are really strong from start to finish - some are awesome, like 'Too Far Gone?', 'Lux AEterna', 'Crown of Barbed Wire' and the aforementioned proggy centrepiece, 'Inamorata'. Just a fantastic record from modern times. Metallica get far too much shit by default from devoted metal dudes, but I'm unashamedly a massive fan, and have been since I was at school. 72 Seasons pleased the fanboy in me greatly when it dropped, and I still play most of these tracks regularly more than a year on.

6. LOAD (1996)

What they say:

"Throwing caution to the wind following the absurd success of The Black Album and confirming that their thrash metal days were well and truly behind them (at least for now), Load saw Metallica dip their toes into everything from grunge to alt-rock to country. The result is a deeply fascinating record that unquestionably features some of the Four Horsemen's most boldy realised leaps of faith; both the emotional 'Bleeding Me' and album-closing epic 'The Outlaw Torn' remain deservedly thought of as two of the most compelling compositions of the band's entire career. There are missteps for sure, and it's a little too long overall, but for many, Load remains the point where Metallica were still truly blazing their own trail and letting ambition guide their creative impulses. It also features some of Hetfield's most impactful lyrics, his introspective self-dissection reaching a new level of insight and raw vulnerability."

What I say:

Personally I think they've placed Load a little too high on their list, but I don't really care. I'm still a fan. It's just nice to see this massively underrated album get the praise it deserves for once!! This album is absolutely 100% nothing like anything the band wrote and recorded back in the '80s - hell, it's not even that comparable to the Black Album if we're being honest. They sure aren't putting the 'Metal' in 'Metallica' on Load!! No, this is a diverse album full of tracks that shift genres (the claims of 'grunge', 'alt-rock' and 'country' are honestly true) and don't try to sound like anything the band had recorded previously. By all means call them sellouts; at this point they didn't even look like the same band that recorded Master of Puppets some 10 years prior! But the fact of the matter is, there's a lot of interesting, creative songs here that stand the test of time.

Favourite tracks for me include up-tempo rocker 'Ain't My Bitch', the heavy blues romp that is '2 X 4', the moody and unsettling 'The House Jack Built', foreboding single 'Until it Sleeps' and the atmospheric epic 'The Outlaw Torn'. Yes, the album is different - and it doesn't always hit the mark. But Metallica sound mature and accomplished on Load, and also unashamed - they pulled it off, and a result the album's a good 'un. Unlike Megadeth when they followed in similar fashion with 1999's Risk!

5. KILL 'EM ALL (1983)

What they say:

"Metallica would become far more layered and sophisticated in their songwriting as the 80s wore on, but even four-plus decades later, there's still something so primal and satisfying about Kill 'Em All's snotty, 'fuck you' attitude and relentless, proto-thrash assault. Smashing together Messrs Hetfield, Ulrich, Burton and Hammett's love of punk rock fury and NWOBHM might with the subtlety of a brick to the groin (with some not inconsiderable help from a certain Mr. Mustaine), the quartet kickstarted a movement and produced one of heavy metal's all-time great debut albums in the process. It's easy to overlook just how stacked with classic 'Tallica cuts Kill 'Em All is, too: 'Hit the Lights', 'The Four Horsemen, 'Motorbreath', 'Whiplash', 'Seek & Destroy'... plenty of bands could release all that, call it a day and consider their career a job well done. Incredibly, Metallica were only just getting started."

What I say:

Yeah, Kill 'Em All is certainly deserving of "one of the all-time great heavy metal debuts" status. Metallica really did kick things off with a monumental bang here - all the songs are classics, and extra special shoutout to Cliff Burton's amazing bass solo track, '(Anesthesia) Pulling Teeth'. Many of these songs are still played regularly by the band live, and for good reason. Putting it at number 5 doesn't bug me, but calling it "proto-thrash" does. Proto-thrash is older stuff like Motorhead's 'Overkill', Judas Priest's 'Exciter', even Black Sabbath's 'Symptom of the Universe' etc.,  Kill 'Em All most definitely is thrash through-and-through. The whole genre began with albums such as this, Slayer's Show No Mercy, Anthrax's Fistful of Metal - and I'd also argue Venom with Black Metal way back in 1982. Either way, Metallica were already fully-fledged thrash metal by the time they recorded this debut. It sits a tad higher than the number 5 slot for me.

4. ... AND JUSTICE FOR ALL (1988)

What they say:

"Depending on who you ask, ...Justice is for all intents and purposes the last of Metallica's 'thrash' records, but sees the band turning their backs on the short, sharp shock stylings they had embraced with their debut in favour of the more epic fare that had become their bread-and-butter. The loss of bassist Cliff Burton can be felt keenly, not least in the controversial decision to completely flatten the mix of newcomer Jason Newsted's contributions, but also in the subtle shifts away from more classical-leaning compositions that Burton had contributed to the band's sound.

In its place is an almost prog-like approach to song structure, Metallica effectively crafting their own metallic symphonies with even the more straight-ahead fare of 'Blackened', '...And Justice for All' and 'The Frayed Ends of Sanity' having multiple movements and segments. Fans might still clamour for Justice for Jason, but ...AJFA shows just how hard Metallica were fighting to reinvent themselves and push their artistry to new levels, towering ballad 'One' awarding them a level of MTV-friendly success that few of their contemporaries have ever been able to match, certainly never surpass."

What I say:

This one is number 2 for me personally, but the authors' description of ...And Justice for All is pretty much spot-on. Yes, the hazing of Jason Newsted means there's almost zero bass tones to speak of. That's an issue that cannot be overlooked. Thing is though, the songs are so damn good that I almost immediately forget about the bass-less sounds every time I listen to the album. In fact, AJFA's songs might just be their best ever, even if the album's not my number 1. The thrashers 'Blackened' and 'Dyers Eve' are among their greatest, 'One' is the best ballad they ever recorded, the title track and 'The Frayed Ends of Sanity' are progressive metal masterpieces while 'Harvester of Sorrow' is a big lumbering chugger and 'Eye of the Beholder' is hugely underrated. It's like they took all the lessons they learned from the first 3 records and used that information to create what is their most immaculately-crafted work of all time. Absolute classic... but yeah, the botched production is the only thing holding it back. Still, I can live with it.

3. THE BLACK ALBUM (1991)

What they say:

"Responding to the overly-ornate compositions of their previous album, Metallica ground their sound into its essential dust on The Black Album, producing one of the best-selling records of all-time in the process. The band didn't lose their thrash entirely - 'Through the Never' and 'Holier Than Thou' have the same bulldozer-through-a-China-shop power that Master of Puppets used so excellently, while the likes of 'Sad But True', 'Enter Sandman' and 'Whether I May Roam' deliver an enormity and instantly gratifying sound that better suited the arenas they were now playing.

Even with that, the band also found a whole universe of depth and artistry with huge ballads like 'The Unforgiven' and 'Nothing Else Matters', the latter even setting the stage for the band's orchestral S&M thanks to some sublime arrangements by Michael Kamen. Naysayers might point to The Black Album as the point where Metallica stopped being Our Band, but therein lies the rub: Metallica were always to ambitious, too commercial and just too damn big to be satisfied with being the biggest fish in a small pond."

What I say:

Hmm. A lot to take in here. The 1991 self-titled (or Black Album, whatever floats your boat) is by no means one of my favourites, but it does have a handful of songs that I do consider to be among their greatest. The sound has been drastically streamlined now, but the melodies and structures can sometimes equal perfection on this album. 'Whether I May Roam' for example, is outstanding. It's far catchier and more simplistic than what they were doing on AJFA, but James' vocal arrangements are amazing, the riffs are heavy and it also contains my favourite Kirk Hammett guitar solo of all time. Other tracks like 'Enter Sandman', 'Holier Than Thou', 'Through the Never' and 'Sad But True' are perfect metal songs for people who don't necessarily listen to metal all that often. No wonder this album sold by the bucketload. Oh, and Bob Rock's production is perfect. HOWEVER, this album's popularity is also a bit of an issue for me. As someone who regularly attends metal and rock concerts, festivals, even likes to check out rock-themed bars and pubs etc., you just can't escape a lot of these songs either. As good as they are, I really don't need to hear 'Enter Sandman' for the billionth time in my life now. I'm bored of it. Also, the ballads 'The Unforgiven' and 'Nothing Else Matters' are good ones for sure, but again, they've been played to death and I almost always skip them now.

The whole "Naysayers might point to The Black Album as the point where Metallica stopped being Our Band" thing is probably true for a lot of old-school fans who were there from the beginning. This doesn't affect me; I'm too young to have been around in the '80s as a metalhead, and I loved Metallica just as much as their earlier stuff when I first started getting into the band as a teenager. But I can understand why some of the earliest fans might feel that way. I will argue that despite Metallica's high points, there's a filler track or 2 on here as well ('Of Wolf and Man', 'The God That Failed'). So really, this is a classic album with moments of songwriting genius... again, they technically did sellout, but many of these songs are just factually brilliant whichever way you look at them. BUT, for personal reasons, it's inescapable popularity does grind on me somewhat, and the album still has some lesser tracks. I do think it's kind of overrated, but then I just listen to 'Whether I May Roam' and then remember why!

2. RIDE THE LIGHTNING (1984)

What they say:

"There's still a youthful rawness to ...Lightning that captures the sparks flying between a youthful Hetfield, Ulrich, Burton and Hammett, the band already extricating themselves from their peers by sheer dint of having the finest songs and most ambitious compositions around. The album's title-track is effectively a dry-run for the epic grandeur the band would ride so thoroughly on follow-up Master of Puppets, while For Whom the Bell Tolls and Creeping Death awarded Metallica their first genuine arena-sized anthems. There are also moments of respite and reflection; 'Fade to Black''s anti-suicide ballad might have ruffled feathers with the full-speed-or-nothin' brigade, but the song's beautiful composition, reflective lyrics and undeniable breakout headbangable moments showed that they had plenty to say and weren't afraid to take chances on themselves."

What I say:

It's my own number 1, but really it's hard to argue with anyone else's top pick if they chose any of the first 4 albums. Ride the Lightning has more sentimental value to me over any other Metallica album, because it was the first one I really sank my teeth into and enjoyed. It's one of the album's I credit with in shaping my own musical journey and tastes, and you won't hear a bad word about it from me. I love all the songs (even 'Escape'!). And I agree with the description from the article; Metallica were already ambitious in their songwriting way back in 1984, as 'Fade to Black' and instrumental 'The Call of Ktulu' demonstrate. But it didn't make them any less metal, it just made them smarter than the majority of their competition. 

1. MASTER OF PUPPETS (1986)

What they say:
"If you drilled down into the atomic structure of heavy metal, the genre's evolution and its watershed moments, you'd probably find Master of Puppets embedded at the core. Black Sabbath might have kickstarted the genre almost 16 years earlier, but Metallica codified metal with their third studio album in ways that are evident in the sheer mind-bending number of bands who have professed an undying love for the album over the subsequent decades.

Thrash gone cinematic, Master... refined and reinforced everything Metallica had done with their second album but bigger, better, harder and yes, more metal. From the delirious rampage of 'Battery' to the tooth-gnashing militaristic blows of 'Disposable Heroes' and careening violence of 'Damage Inc.' to the iconic title-track, Metallica never again sounded as all-conquering as they would on Master of Puppets, slower efforts like 'The Thing That Should Not Be' introducting a sludgy dynamism that showed the band's toolkit was varied.

Again wetting their beaks with ballad 'Welcome Home (Sanitarium)', Metallica were carrying themselves away from being anybody's back-up to instead be absolute champions in their own right. A tour with Ozzy Osbourne helped cement them as metal's Hot New Things and even the tragedy of the crash that took bassist Cliff Burton couldn't slow the unstoppable machine the band had set into motion by writing an album so undeniably massive and untouchable that it basically created a division between themselves and just about every other metal hopeful at that point. A serious contender for the greatest metal album of all time, it's no overstatement that the spirit of Master echoes in everything from Machine Head's The Blackening to Gojira's Magma and just about any other grandiose, epic metal effort put to tape. You can all rest easy: the Master is here."

What I say:

The predictable critics' number 1 pick for any Metallica list, and often the top choice for any generic mainstream critics' ranking for the greatest metal albums of all time. An undeniably important album in the shaping of metal, but it's also not really that different from what they were doing on Ride the Lightning 2 years prior. I think if I'd started with Master instead of RtL, then it could well be my own favourite, but as it stands, it's not. Both are absolute classics, but like the self-titled, there's songs on here that are still played to death to this very day, particularly the title track which I'm sick to death of, and ballad 'Welcome Home (Sanitarium)' kind of irritates me nowadays. But they're not bad songs in any sense of the word (they're amazing), it's just a personal issue that stems from being a metalhead for more than 2 thirds of my life. So yeah, not gonna argue with Loudersound's placement, but it's number 3 for me. 

The only thing that annoyed me here was the authors' shoutout to Machine Head's The Blackening. If ever there was an overrated album with journalists, it's the fucking Blackening from critics' favourite little metal band in the world, Machine Head!! The same band that also produced the utter turkey that is Supercharger!! I will never understand their obsession for that fucking band.

Overall this was a fairly predictable list with no real surprises or any serious disagreements from me - even if my own ranking is quite a lot different. Metallica is nowhere near a top 3 for me personally, but it was such a huge record for the band I can still see why it ranked so high in this article. And it was nice to see the respect for Load. The only real disagreement for me was seeing Hardwired above Death Magnetic - naaaahh! I can't really justify that choice! Hardwired is a fine album, but it's definitely patchier than it's predecessor. Maybe the critics' choices are always fairly similar, but there's a lot of great albums in this discography that I often see fans' own favourite picks differ a lot from one another. Anyway, this is my own list:

11. St. Anger (2003)

10. Reload (1997)

9. Hardwired... to Self-Destruct (2016)

8. Load (1996)

7. Death Magnetic (2008)

6. Metallica (1991)

5. 72 Seasons (2023)

4. Kill 'Em All (1983)

3. Master of Puppets (1986)

2. ...And Justice for All (1988)

1. Ride the Lightning (1984)

The pros and cons of concerts!

Just a fun post discussing many of the different aspects of attending concerts!!

Ticket prices:

The first and most obvious thing I can moan about regarding concerts these days are the damn prices of tickets. I paid £81 to see Judas Priest with Saxon and Uriah Heep at the NEC (Resorts World) in Birmingham in March this year. In February of 2009, I swear to god I paid less than £40 to see Priest with Megadeth and Testament at the very same venue!! That means the prices have more than doubled in 15 years!! I'm not saying I feel ripped off paying the £81; it was a great show, and I enjoyed the hell out of it from start to finish... it's just one of those inflation issues that gradually builds over time, and I don't realise just how expensive concerts can be until I look at what I used to pay when I first started attending them. I guess a band/artist has to make a living in some way, especially if people aren't buying albums these days (despite the fact CDs and vinyls are arguably more popular in 2024 than they were a few years ago). 

On the plus side, I don't feel like I pay that much more these days for music festival tickets than I did back in the day. I think Bloodstock is something like £30 more these days than it was back in 2010, when I attended for the first ever time - and many of the bands they book these days are more popular with the masses and would have been too 'big' to have appeared on old lineups anyway. Considering how many bands you can technically see at a festival, I've always thought they were pretty good value tickets for the most part. I can't speak for festivals like Reading, Glastonbury etc., but the one's I go to don't feel much more expensive these days at least. That whole 'service fee' bullshit from vendors like Ticketmaster or Ticket Factory does piss me off though!

Merchandise:

When it comes to buying merch, most of my own experiences have been pretty positive overall. I think the prices are only crazy depending on how popular the artist is, and the size/scale of the venue. There's only been a few gigs I've been to where I found the merch to be selling for outright rip-off prices. When I saw the Rolling Stones in 2018 at the Principality Stadium in Cardiff, I swear to god the tour shirts were selling for £50 or some other absurd price!! Hoodies were something like £70/£80!! I had gone into that gig with the intention of buying a tour shirt, but I just couldn't justify those ridiculous prices... and yet there I was 3 months ago at the Judas Priest gig at the NEC willingly paying ludicrous prices for tour shirts!! I'm a massive hypocrite in this instance - the tour shirts were £40 each and I bought one. They were definitely a rip-off - I mean, I love the shirt, but in terms of the actual quality, it's no better than any other tour shirt I've ever bought. I have a few Priest tour shirts from over the years, and they've never charged this much in the past. The fact they're one of my absolute favourite bands meant I had to have one though. I saw Smashing Pumpkins and Weezer at the Utilita Arena a couple of months back and didn't even bother looking at the merch... I just knew they'd be absurdly pricey. It always seems to be the more popular artists that charge the most. Go online however, and their merch is often sold at about 1/3 the price.

Like I said though, for the most part it's rare I've felt ripped-off whenever I bought merch from the majority of past gigs I've attended. Generally speaking, 90% of the tour shirts I own (and I own a fair few) have cost me £20-£25. I don't mind paying that. Some shirts I've bought from smaller/support bands have cost me £15 at times. I find that smaller/club venue gigs often have bands selling CDs/vinyl too. This is always cool, because sometimes I'd prefer to buy a CD than a shirt. And again, I see CDs being sold from anywhere between £7-£12. Not bad at all, and it's actually kinda humbling to physically give a band money in person.

Drinks:

I like a drink or 5 when I attend concerts, I can't deny that. Shame then, that the price of a pint just keeps on increasing as the years go by. KK's Steel Mill in Wolverhampton is just about the only venue that I semi-regularly attend concerts whereby the drinks prices aren't extortionate. They're still higher than you'd pay for in the average pub of course (unless you live in London), but this is to be expected from a venue. What sucks is the fact that an awful lot of gigs I end up going to are held at any of the 02 Academy/Institute branches of venues, where you'll now pay a minimum of £8 for a pint of subpar macro lager like Carlsberg or San Miguel, and if your lucky, a pint of Shipyard IPA. 8 fucking quid!!! I was at the Utilita Arena in Birmingham a couple of weeks back to see Smashing Pumpkins and Weezer, and was paying something like £9 for a pint of Madri, aka fake Spanish lager designed and brewed in the UK!!! Occasionally I end up driving to concerts. This tends to happen at gigs I attend by myself, because I don't mind teetotaling when I go solo. This saves me a lot of money.

I can refrain from drinking at gigs when not driving, but I unapologetically like to drink, especially with mates. Although it has happened here and there throughout the years, I very rarely end up getting properly rat-arsed, because I do at least want to remember the show. The best times I've had have been jumping on the train to Birmingham early and sinking a few pints in the pub before the gig, and possibly going for food in a restaurant too. It makes a full day of it, but obviously this type of plan isn't always possible due to work commitments etc..

Sound quality:

I think the sound quality of concerts is better now than it was when I first started going to gigs in the mid to late 2000's. I doubt there's been many technological advancements in that space of time! Or maybe my hearing was just much better in those days?! Either way I remember when I was in my teens I'd occasionally find that the bass and drums were too loud, while the vocals and guitars were sometimes buried in the mix... it's been a while since I've thought this way from any gig I've been to in recent years. I don't know if PA/mixing consoles just keep getting better but I'm guessing they haven't evolved that much over the past couple of decades?

That said, when things do sound bad, it really can affect the enjoyment of a performance. One of the most memorable experiences in terms of gig sound quality that I can remember was Scott Travis' drums at the Judas Priest concert at the NEC way back in 2009. It was so loud I could physically feel it go through my body!! And then there was Motorhead in 2010... I don't ever wear ear plugs to concerts (and I'm likely paying the price for it now), but that's the only gig I've ever attended where I felt like I needed them. They were stupidly loud! Meanwhile, the quietest performance I've ever stood through was Nine Inch Nails' set at Sonisphere 2009... so many mellow ballads I could speak at normal volume to my mate beside me!

Venue sizes:

For the most part, I prefer club-sized venues - ones that hold a few hundred people. Not because of sound quality or anything like that, no, it's mostly to do with how low-effort I can be. Like, I can show up whenever I want and get a decent standing spot 90% of the time. And because I like to drink at concerts, I can use the toilets whenever I feel like it and can almost always get my spot back, or somewhere close at the very least. Arena-sized venues are okay; if I need to use the toilets whilst a band is playing, it's normally not a big deal. And getting out of there is never a chore either; there's not enough people to affect any public transportation for the journey home, nor is there any mad rush of thousands of people all leaving at the same time.

It's stadiums that can be an issue! I saw both Foo Fighters and Bruce Springsteen this year, the former at Villa Park and the latter at Wembley Stadium. Both concerts were brilliant, but it'd been years since I'd last been to a stadium-sized gig. We had to turn up ridiculously early to get anywhere near the front, and for Foo Fighters I think I drank 2 pints of lager, meaning I had to use the toilets at one point! Naturally, this meant I had to wade through thousands of tightly-packed people to try and get back to my original spot (which was very close to the stage). As for Bruce, I didn't even bother drinking. Once we were actually allowed into the venue, I never left my spot until the performance was actually over. Luckily I could freely use the toilets whilst I was queuing outside because once I was in the stadium, I was stood in the same spot for over 5 hours!

Seating/standing:

I've always been more of a standing kind of guy in my years of gig-going. Obviously club-sized venues often don't offer seating, but for a lot of the larger gigs I've been to, I would still normally stand anyway. I've never had much issue with it, until I've gotten a little older! I think for any stadium concerts I attend in the future, I might just start buying seated tickets if I can. Like I said in the last paragraph, I hate wading through thousands of people if I need the toilet. With a seated ticket, this is irrelevant because you'll never lose your spot. When I saw the Rolling Stones in 2018, we had seated tickets - so naturally, I was sinking a lot of pints because it wasn't a big deal if I needed to piss anyway! I will say though, that seated tickets can suck depending on where you're sat. I'll definitely still stand if the only seated tickets available are a mile away from the stage, or about 1000 feet high up. I know that there's massive screens to the sides of the stage, but it's not the same as clearly being able to see what's happening on stage.

I've been to a few entirely-seated concerts in my time. Deep Purple at the Utilita Arena was entirely-seated, and I was sat on the ground area not too far back from the stage. Same goes for Judas Priest this year at the NEC. I'm not really for or against this set-up. I'm 6'1" tall, so I can usually see okay regardless. What was strange however, is that everyone in the ground area was seated for the entirety of Deep Purple, until the encore when everyone stood up. Yet for Judas Priest it was the exact same scenario only everybody stood up for the entire set. Makes you wonder why they even bothered putting seating in the ground area. It didn't bother me - in fact, it was quite nice to put my jacket and merch down on the seat behind me while I stood. But it still made me wonder why it was seated. I also saw Magnum in 2022 at the Symphony Hall in Birmingham. This venue only offers seated shows. Again, everybody stood!

I'll be seeing Deep Purple again at the NEC in November. It's a fully-seated show again, but I bought tickets to the side of the stage this time. I find that people tend to stay seated in these areas, and the view is always decent because it's higher up than on the ground level. I'm taking my girlfriend too, and I figured it'd be nicer for her... we have very different music tastes, so she isn't as fussed about standing!

Moshing:

Obviously this category isn't relevant for a lot of gigs. I used to enjoy the mosh pit when I was younger at all the thrash/death metal shows I've been to. Depending on the crowd, it could be a lot of fun. Generally speaking, if you fell down, someone would be right there to put you back on your feet. Also, if someone was legitimately hurt, people do make sure they're moved out of the pit. Nothing's really changed in terms of moshing at metal concerts. If you don't do moshing, just stay away from the middle of the stage a few rows back, because that's where it normally happens. I think circle pits are okay, if a little silly. Mostly harmless however.

What I don't like - and I will never understand the point of it - is all that 'slam dancing' karate, crowd-killing bullshit. It's not something I see all that often at metal shows, but I do clearly remember seeing some absolute morons flailing their arms and doing Chuck Norris roundhouse kicks all over the place at Agnostic Front several years ago, and also at Ingested in 2022. What is the fucking point?! All it does is make less people want to mosh. Whatever.

I almost never mosh anymore in my 30s. I think the last time I was in a pit for the entirety of a show was when I saw Napalm Death in 2020. It's not because I hate it, I think it's just an age thing now and I can't be bothered these days. I prefer to just stand and watch the band in peace these days, and drink beer!

Phone usage:

People taking photos or filming on their phones isn't necessarily a pet peeve of mine; I mean, it rarely (if ever) affects my own enjoyment of a concert... I just don't understand people who spend more time filming the gig and watching it through their phone than actually watching the show and savouring the moment! At Judas Priest in March, the guy next to me must've spent 70% of the show recording the performance on his phone. He wasn't blocking my view or anything, but I could see him in the corner of my eye and I just don't understand peoples' thinking behind this. Do they really go back and watch the videos they made?! Is the sound quality actually good?! I wouldn't know, 'cos I usually just take a handful of pictures and then spend the rest of the gig watching the band play with my eyes, not my phone. Every single gig I've been to has had professional photographers present, so I tend to just look on the band's Facebook if I want to see the best pics.

Like I said, it bugs me - but generally speaking, excessive phone usage at concerts normally doesn't directly impact my own experience. One of my mates saw Tool this year, and they famously have a 'no phones' policy at their concerts. Makes the band sound like little Hitlers, but honestly I'm kind of in favour of it. My mate said it was great. I just can't justify Tool's ticket prices!! Then again, maybe the zero tolerance on phones makes it all the more worth it?

Length of performances:

Depending on the artist, I find most headlining performances tend to last about an hour and a half, on average. This is fine by me. I've seen a handful of sets that lasted 3 or close to 3 hours long as well. This is also fine, if the band knows what they're doing. A lot of the more underground extreme metal concerts often have shorter headline sets, and I think this is partly due to the fact you normally get more support acts too. When I saw Nile all the way back in '09, I literally sat through 4 support bands prior!! Support acts themselves an last anywhere between 30 mins and an hour depending on where they are on the bill or how many other bands are playing. Yep, not a lot to say here. It's rare I've come home from a gig and felt dissatisfied with the band's time on stage - or bored for that matter.

Concert schedules:

As I've gotten older, this is an area I can really moan about!! Most venue doors open around 6 or 7pm, and because I don't live in a rock scene hotspot, I normally have to get the train to Birmingham or Wolverhampton for the vast majority of the concerts I go to. Since concerts tend to end around 11pm (ish), I normally don't get home until 12-1am because of the train journey home. I occasionally drive to concerts if I'm going alone, and sometimes I can get home before 12am if the gig in question was in Wolverhampton! But like I said, it's usually early hours in the morning by the time I can get back to my bed.

This never used to bother me. In my teens and 20s, I had way more energy. Now I'm a bit older, I really wish venue doors would open around 2pm, so I can be home by around 10pm at the latest!! It's a personal gripe; there's no way in hell venues will ever open several hours earlier. People have work (including me) and can't get to shows until later - but I wish weekend concerts would at least start earlier! There's been times when I've made a full day of it, by booking a hotel in the city and going out drinking in pubs and bars after the show has finished, but obviously this is dependent on who I'm with and how much money I've got. Ahh well, getting home late is just something I'll always have to deal with and accept!! It's not like I'm not used to it at this point in my years of concert-going.

When all is said and done, I don't think I'll ever get tired of going to gigs. Any of the annoyances are worth dealing with, because you just can't beat a live performance when the band/artist in question are on top form.

TURISAS

Reviewed:

- Battle Metal (2004)

- The Varangian Way (2007)

- Stand Up and Fight (2011)

- Turisas2013 (2013)

BATTLE METAL          2004          (Century Media)

- Standouts: 'As Torches Rise', 'Battle Metal', 'The Land of Hope and Glory', 'One More', 'Midnight Sunrise', 'Among Ancestors', 'Rex Rebi Rebellis'

I'm no folk metal connoisseur, but it is a style of metal that I've always somewhat enjoyed ever since I was first properly exposed to it way back in 2010 whilst attending my first ever Bloodstock Open Air festival. It's the kind of subgenre that I don't think I'll ever take 100% seriously, nor is it the kind of metal that would spawn masterpiece albums of the metal genre in general in my opinion. But it can be a lot of fun depending on the band, and Turisas are the only band in this style where I actually own all of their albums. I mean, they only ever made 4 and have now kind of disappeared into hiatus, but whatever!

So, Battle Metal is their 2004 debut and that album title pretty much tells you everything you need to know. This is record is basically the musical equivalent of an epic Viking battle - and if not Viking, then a medieval, Norman or Saxon-era battle of some sort. And if not based on reality, then think something along the lines of the battle of Helm's Deep in Lord of the Rings!

Once the short instrumental opening 'Victoriae & Triumphi Dominus' is out of the way, the album has me intrigued from more-or-less start to finish. The music is heavy, but the way all the more traditional instrumentals such as accordions, violins and a whole host of percussion, as well as the keyboards and any electronic aids have been incorporated is what makes this record, well, a folk metal album. Yeah, there's metal riffs on every song, but unlike a lot of metal in general, they're almost never the focal point of the song structures. The riffs are there, but it's all these other instruments that provide the real melody to the songs and give them that 'epic' feel that is unique to this style of music. It's also largely those instruments and their melodies that help me to remember and differentiate each track, because these are the instruments that often provide the most memorable parts of the songs. That's not to say the guitars aren't any less important; without those big distorted metal riffs you'd just have the 'folk' part of 'folk metal'!!

I also really like the way the vocals have been handled. Turisas are a Finnish band, but vocalist Mathias Nygard sings in English and in a harsh growly style for the much of the album. I couldn't call them death metal vocals, nor could I call them black metal screams - but they're not clean either. They add to the intensity of the songs though, because this is Battle Metal after all! Even if you don't normally get on with growly vocals in more extreme metal, I don't think the one's should turn you off hearing Battle Metal for yourself. The music itself is nowhere near extreme enough to come close to death metal and whatnot. And on songs like the more mellow 'One More', Nygard does sing clean too. He's not a particularly great clean vocalist as such, but his modest style almost makes it seem as if someone from history is actually narrating these tunes, as corny as that seems.

Also important regarding the vocals is the large use of layered vocal harmonies and choir chants. Again, like all the folk instrument usage, these are essential in providing the epic feel of the music that the band were going for. And once again, these can often be the parts that will stick in your head afterwards, for example, a song like 'The Land of Hope and Glory' relies on it's big vocal arrangements. There's also occasional female operatic vocals in some of the songs, particularly 'Midnight Sunrise'. And again, they've been utilised really well overall, and are integral to the enjoyment of the music.

I do have some negativity towards Battle Metal though. This is not an album I can play any day or time of the week. It's very much an album-focused effort, as silly as that sounds. What I mean by that is, I almost never find myself putting any of the individual tracks here into a playlist and listen to them on their own. They just don't work like that for me, since I feel the music is too atmospheric and niche to make me want to pick out random songs individually. It's an album that I like to hear from start to finish, and even then I still have to be in the right mood for it. And that's not necessarily true of folk metal in general, because there's songs by bands like Finntroll or Ensiferum (and even later stuff from Turisas) that I can listen to in a mixed playlist. I won't say it's too long - the whole thing clocks in at just under an hour, which is fine I guess. But there has been occasions where I've started this album, got maybe 4 tracks in and then turned it off due to boredom.

The other gripe is the production. Well, it's not entirely a gripe, but I do have some issues. It's not that the album sounds bad sonically, it's just that tracks such as 'Rex Rebi Rebellis' have what I can assume are either keyboards/synths playing what are meant to be horns. They don't sound awful by any means, and I do get used to them... but it does mean the songs occasionally sound less organic than they should. They don't sound like real horns, that's all - and the real thing is always better. This sounds like a big deal, but at the end of the day it isn't for me. I still enjoy practically every aspect of the music, I just think there's room for improvement at times is all.

But like I said, if I am in the correct mood, I get really lost in this album and have a hell of a good time. I stuck this on in the gym the other day and my whole session was almost over before I knew it. I think this is a fine folk metal album that any fan of said genre should be checking out if they haven't already. Yeah it's nerdy, but then being nerdy is cool nowadays!

Adam's rating: 8.1/10

THE VARANGIAN WAY          2007          (Century Media)

- Standouts: 'To Holmgard and Beyond', 'A Portage to the Unknown', 'Fields of Gold', 'Five Hundred and One', 'The Dnieper Rapids', 'Miklagard Overture'

They got off to a good start with Battle Metal, a bit like a successful independent film with a cult following. With The Varangian Way, it now feels like the band have been escalated into a Hollywood blockbuster. Fear not however, because this doesn't necessarily mean they've 'sold out' or anything like that. No, it just means the album sounds far better production-wise, the music has gotten even more epic (somehow) and the whole record feels much more streamlined this time - in a good way.

Practically all core musical elements of Battle Metal remain here too, but they've now improved across the board. I think a lot of is down to the production, meaning all the folky instruments now sound much more genuine, the guitars are bigger (but not overbearing) and any of the choir vocal parts are even vaster and somehow more grandiose now. The songs are once again also full of all the clean and growled vocals you could ever want. Opening track 'To Holmgard and Beyond' might be the best folk metal track I've ever heard - it makes me wanna grow my hair and beard out, jump aboard a Viking longship and set sail for, erm... somewhere!! Speaking of Vikings, The Varangian Way is actually a concept album about a bunch of Scandinavians travelling through medieval Eastern Europe, or something. Yeah, I'm not all about the story when it comes to concept albums, but it's not really something that affects my rating of an album either. If the music's good, I'm happy. If it just happens to tell a story, then that's cool too I guess.

I think this album is better in many ways than Battle Metal. It helps that the album is 43 minutes long rather just under an hour - it never gets particularly dull or tedious at any point throughout the listening experience, and the 8 songs that feature are more memorable overall because of it. The other thing that separates The Varangian Way from it's predecessor - well, for me at least - is the fact I can actually listen plenty of these tracks individually now. Not necessarily all of them, but many. As I said, I absolutely love 'To Holmgard and Beyond' - such a killer song!! And I also find myself replaying 'Fields of Gold' a lot too. There's something about the accordion melody in it that just plays over and over in my head, and the whole song is just about one of the most triumphant slices of metal I can think of. 'Five Hundred and One' is pretty special too. It has moments of beauty with both it's intro and outro, whilst the middle of the track gets me pumped!

Of course, The Varangian Way isn't perfect. I think 'Cursed Be Iron' focuses just a tad too much on spoken-word segments, so it isn't really what I'd consider to be 'easy listening' metal. It works when you listen to the album as a whole, but it's not one I ever revisit on it's own merit. I also think 'In the Court of Jarisleif' is maybe a little too folky, as weird as that sounds? Not necessarily in terms of the instruments themselves - there's plenty of metal guitar tones written all over it. No, the actual structure of the music is very, erm... traditionally inspired I guess? And again, it works when I want to listen to the album from start to finish. But when taken on it's own, it can be a bit of a chore to listen to. And once again, I don't think I can step into the 9/10 region when rating this thing. I still have to be in the right sort of mood to listen to this album in full, even if this one is a slightly easier to listen to than the debut. It's not like a Black Sabbath or Judas Priest record, which for me I can hear anytime anywhere and love it.

Yep, if you liked Battle Metal, you'd be foolish not to check this out. The music's even cheesier and more epic in all the best ways. But just to clarify, despite the fact I think this album is superior to Battle Metal, I still really enjoy that debut. I don't think The Varangian Way is leaps and bounds better than it's predecessor, I just think it's a definite improvement. So if for whatever reason you can only own 1 Turisas album, make sure it's The Varangian Way... otherwise don't skimp on Battle Metal! Both are great.

Adam's rating: 8.4/10

STAND UP AND FIGHT          2011          (Century Media)

- Standouts: 'Take the Day!', 'Stand Up and Fight', 'Hunting Pirates', 'The Great Escape', 'End of an Empire'

On their 3rd album, 2011's Stand Up and Fight, Turisas continues to sound like Turisas! However, in the same way that The Varangian Way was subtly different to Battle Metal, Stand Up and Fight is also subtly different to it's predecessor (well, maybe a little more than just 'subtly' this time). Not vastly different, but different enough for me to almost immediately realise which album any of these tracks are from without looking first. If anything, I'd say this album is a tad more accessible than the previous records. I still think they always had hooks in many of their songs, but this time they're more conventional and memorable. Hell, the first time I heard 'Take the Day!', I was surprised to hear that many of it's vocal and musical arrangements were comparable to that of '80s arena rock/AOR!! The instrumentation itself on a song like 'Take the Day!' is still unmistakeably that of the folk metal brand Turisas do so well, only this time it has a slight commercial sheen about it. And surprisingly enough, it works! The keyboard-heavy title track too, has some definite arena rock inspiration behind it, and has me singing along in next to no time.

This is a band that never focused entirely on harsh vocals; they always had clean vocals throughout many of their songs, but on Stand Up and Fight I feel like the harsher vocals have been toned down somewhat, and overall there's far more clean vocals on this album. And to be honest, given that the music itself is a little more accessible anyway, I don't take issue with this. The songs still largely retain the epic atmosphere of the previous albums despite the slightly different take on the music this time around. And to be honest, there's still plenty of material on here that doesn't really offer any real surprises to the listener, e.g. songs like 'The March of the Varangian Guard', 'Venetoi! -Prasinoi!', 'The Great Escape' and the lengthy 'End of an Empire'. There's also a fun song that reminds me of Alestorm (only slightly less silly) in 'Hunting Pirates' - ooh, I wonder what it is about this track that reminds me of Alestorm?!

I think this is once again another rock-solid effort from the band, yet I still think I prefer both Battle Metal and The Varangian Way over it. I think, at times, parts of the songs tread a little closer to power and/or symphonic metal more-so than they do folk metal. I guess this isn't necessarily a bad thing for everyone, but there's something slightly less mesmerising about the music this time around. If I listen to the first couple of records undistracted, they sort of manage to transport me to another world with their grandeur, whereas Stand Up and Fight only manages to do the same for me at times. The epicness is still there, but the... erm... majesticness isn't always?! I know what I mean, I just don't quite know how to word it!! Maybe it's also partly down to the storytelling, like I have a harder time picturing in my head the Varangian Guard that this album talks about more so than I do the lyrical matter of The Varangian Way?

Overall, this is an album that I think is very, very good - but not quite great. However, I wouldn't argue with someone if Stand Up and Fight is their favourite Turisas album either. I'd understand if it was - I'd even agree that 'Take the Day!' is among one of their best songs ever because despite it having more of a streamlined approach to the music, it's also one of their most well-rounded songs for it. And the songs are still full of all the orchestral instrumentation, accordions, keyboards etc., that you've come to expect from Turisas. I'd argue the production has gotten even better too. They just sometimes do things in a way that doesn't quite work as well for me personally as they did on Battle Metal and The Varangian Way! That said, I can still totally recommend Stand Up and Fight to anyone who enjoyed anything else by this band. I can also recommend NWOBHM band Quartz' 1980 album of the same name (which even has a similar album cover to Turisas'!)!!

Adam's rating: 7.9/10

TURISAS2013          2013          (Century Media)

- Standouts: 'For Your Own Good', 'Ten More Miles', 'Piece by Piece'

Going purely by the packaging, something feels off with Turisas2013. I don't like how the photo of Nygard on the cover is cut off above his mouth, and even the album title itself seems half-arsed and completely unlike Turisas somehow. The whole thing just screams 'lazy'. And then there's the reviews - although there are positive one's out there (check out Angry Metal Guy's review), many of them claim this album to be mediocre or just straight-up bad. Well, there's only one way to find out. Are Turisas still winning their epic battle on Turisas2013 or are they retreating with their tail between their legs?

Honestly, the first couple of tracks are fairly decent in my books. 'For Your Own Good' is, like a lot of their material, surprisingly catchy and the main melody sticks in my head. It still has most of the folky elements the band trademarked, but like the odd track from Stand Up and Fight, there's some arena rock/AOR influence in here. It isn't as good as a song like 'Stand Up and Fight', but still solid overall. 'Ten More Miles' however, sounds like classic Turisas. There's a melody in this track that reminds me of the kind of thing John Williams would compose in a Star Wars soundtrack, so the epicness is definitely there. It also makes heavy use of choir and clean vocals, and is probably one of the better tracks here. The highly symphonic 'Piece by Piece' sounds very Varangian Way-like to me as well, so I can't really complain about this one either. 'Greek Fire' is pretty damn good. The crushing riffs are awesome, and while it's lacking in the folk department, it's a cool song on it's own accord. 

I can't really decide whether or not I'm a fan of 'Into the Free'. I like it's fast tempo, but for the most part it just sounds like generic Euro power metal. And Nygard's clean vocals don't really do it justice either... if someone like Michael Kiske of Helloween sang on it, it could be awesome. But as it happens, I just find the vocals to be really mediocre on this track. The music's solid though. And what the fuck is up with 'Run, Bhang-Eater, Run!'?! Why does it seem to be influenced by jazz more than anything else? But more importantly, why does it have random female sex moans on it?! I'd like to give it some credit and say it has some sort of novelty, but in reality it's just a messy composition. 'No Good Story Ever Starts With Drinking Tea' is... kinda fun I guess? It's almost like a taster of if Turisas mixed folk with punk rock! A whole album like this could be cool, but by itself this song doesn't fit in with the rest of the album whatsoever. And while most of the core musical Turisas elements are definitely present throughout this record, many of the folk-based arrangements feel a little unambitious this time, and the music feels a bit less epic for it now. Just listen to 'The Days Passed' and then compare it to something like 'Fields of Gold' to see what I mean.

One definite downgrade here is the production. To me, every Turisas album improved sonically, until this thing dropped. There's just no balls this time around! The guitars might be distorted, but they kinda sound like they're being played through a beginner's amp purchased at Argos. And in general, everything just feels watered down and 'softened up' somehow. I think if you listened to this record without hearing the others first, you probably wouldn't be picking so many holes with the production. But the fact of the matter is that Turisas2013 is easily the worst-sounding Turisas album. To be honest, I can see where a lot of these mediocre reviews are coming from. Although Turisas2013 does have it's moments, the product as a whole feels rushed and incomplete. It's like they ran back into the studio with a bunch of leftover ideas from Stand Up and Fight, recorded them and made sure the album was on the shelves as soon as possible without actually taking the time to finetune the tracks. Maybe there is something to be said about this - there hasn't been another Turisas album since and since 2022, the band have either been on hiatus or they've just split completely. From what I can tell online, they haven't performed live since before COVID either.

So yeah - this was their swansong, and not a particularly good one at that. Granted, some of the songs are decent, but there's also a few dodgy ones making the album feel unfocused because of them. Coupled with the weird production, this is the one Turisas album that just isn't worth your time. I'll give it a 5/10, because I'd say there's enough stuff on here from to consider Turisas2013 average at best, but not much more. Shame.

Adam's rating: 5/10

Deep Purple - thoughts on the upcoming new album, =1

As a Deep Purple fanatic, I'm obviously quite psyched for the new album, =1. It's scheduled for release on the 19th July, just under 2 weeks time. I have both the CD and vinyl on pre-order (it's rare for me to pre-order both formats, but I kinda just thought "why not?" this time), plus a t-shirt. =1 will be the first studio album to feature guitarist Simon McBride, who has been with the band since 2022, after Steve Morse's sudden departure due to his wife's illness. I was initially disappointed to hear Morse's departure (although I completely understand why he left) - I've always loved Morse's playing, he brought a style to Deep Purple that was different to what Ritchie Blackmore was doing, yet also crafted a new and exciting sound that was trademark to the band for several decades. A Deep Purple album with Steve Morse is not the same as a Deep Purple album with Ritchie Blackmore, but is still fantastic for different reasons.

I saw the band live in October 2022, meaning I actually got to experience a Purple concert with Simon McBride. I wasn't entirely sure what to expect at first, but by the end of the night I was on board with McBride. I think his playing style is actually a little closer to Blackmore than Morse without completely impersonating him. Either way, I think Simon fits in the band just fine. Well, at least in the live setting.

But then we've also had 3 singles from the new album in the past few months - 'Portable Door', 'Pictures of You' and now 'Lazy Sod' too. And honestly, I like them all. In fact, I think 'Pictures of You' and 'Lazy Sod' in particular are great. 'Pictures of You' is full of extremely memorable hooks - it's more-or-less a pop rock track with Purple's stamp of approval, and I've played it over and over since it's release. 'Lazy Sod' on the other hand, has a much more retro rocker feel to it, and in my opinion sounds a little closer to '70s Mk. II-era Deep Purple. Meanwhile, 'Portable Door' kind of sounds like classic Purple mixed with Morse-era Purple. Good stuff. I have a limited numbered CD single copy of 'Pictures of You' (5000 in total, mine is number 1915), 'cos you know... I have collector's syndrome!

If these singles are anything to go by, I think we could be in for a diverse album with =1. I also think we could also be in for the most distinctly retro-sounding Purple album in a very long time. Aside from McBride, Purple have existed with Ian Gillan, Roger Glover, Ian Paice and Don Airey since 2003's Bananas, and they've been working with producer Bob Ezrin since 2013's Now What?! (one of my favourite Deep Purple records ever) - so they definitely have a particular style of songwriting that I don't think will stray too far from any of the past bunch of albums. But at the same time I think Simon's guitar playing seems to bring a bit more '70s flair to the band than they did with Morse, at least on these singles anyway.  

Ian Gillan is way past his prime as a singer, and he knows this. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy any of the more modern Purple albums any less. He's adapted his vocals to suit the songs as he ages. I think Glover and Paice are still a rock-solid rhythm section, and I can't fault either of them whatsoever on these new recordings. As for Don Airey, well, that man's just a keyboard wizard. Jon Lord seemed so irreplaceable, and he kinda was. I think only Airey could fill that man's shoes.

I'm not sure how =1 will stack up next to albums such as Now What?! (2013), Infinite (2017) and Whoosh! (2020), but I'm quite confident it will be in a similar ballpark to them in terms of quality. I think Now What?! is outstanding, so maybe it won't be that good, but I still really like Infinite and Whoosh!, therefore am feeling very hopeful overall. And I can definitely just assume it will walk all over the 2021 covers album, Turning to Crime. I must admit, as far as covers albums go, I think Turning to Crime is actually quite fun for the most part, and seem to enjoy it more and more over time. But let's not forget that it is just a covers album, and one they recorded for fun during the COVID lockdowns, therefore is not really even worth using as a comparison. I am a little relieved that Turning to Crime will not be the final Deep Purple album however!!

I don't really have any major negative emotions towards this new record, just small gripes. 'Portable Door' isn't quite as strong as 'Pictures of You' or 'Lazy Sod' in my humble opinion, but I still enjoy it. I think the album cover is a bit uninspired however. Look at it! Plain white with minimal text in the centre!! Far too similar to Now What?! (maybe the only bad thing about that album), only even more minimalistic! Yet at the same time I don't really 'hate' the artwork either... it's quite clean and weirdly artsy in a modern kind of way (not that I know anything about modern art). It is a bit odd though, because the singles have their own artwork, and the t-shirt I have on pre-order is very cool. Whatever.

So yeah, bring on =1. 13 days left...

Black Sabbath - Anno Domini 1989-1995 and general rambles about Tony Martin-era Sabbath

This box set has been a long time coming, Anno Domini 1989-1995, which features each Tony Martin-era Black Sabbath studio album (bar 1987's The Eternal Idol) - 1989's Headless Cross, 1990's Tyr, 1994's Cross Purposes and 1995's Forbidden. Due to them originally being released on the defunct I.R.S. record label, it became increasingly difficult to find each of these albums unless you were willing to pay an arm and a leg for them. And it was impossible to officially stream them too outside of old YouTube uploads. But here we are in 2024 and they're finally available once again, both physically and for streaming! Even better still is the fact they've all been newly-remastered, while Forbidden has been given a much-needed remix! The reason The Eternal Idol is missing is because that was the only Martin-era album that's been widely available and re-released many times over the years, presumably because it was released on the Vertigo/Warner Bros. label.

Before I talk more in detail about the new box set however, I'd like to talk about my own history with Tony Martin-era Sabbath. Well, I've always been a big fan of almost all eras of Sabbath, for different reasons. The first post-Ozzy Sabbath album I ever bought was Born Again with Ian Gillan on vocals - waayy back when I was about 14 years old - and I loved it, despite already being a huge fan of the original line-up and already owning all 8 of those records. I remember owning all 3 of the Dio-era albums in my last year of school and before I turned 16; I saw the band live in 2007 with Dio when they were performing under that silly 'Heaven and Hell' moniker (I wished they'd just used the Black Sabbath brand, because that's what it was). I never owned any of the Tony Martin stuff until I was 16 however, although I was aware that Tony Iommi had made 5 albums with this guy on vocals.

So anyway, I remember stumbling across a copy of The Eternal Idol when I was 16 years old; I'd finished school and it was during the summer holiday before I was due to start college. I found an old used CD copy of the album in a market stall selling used albums in either Coventry or Leamington Spa (can't remember which). It cost me £3, and I remember that because the damn sticker is still on the booklet, and if I try to remove it, it fucks up the album cover! Still, £3 for an absolutely classic album that I immediately loved from first listen. The songs on this album are mostly awesome; and in all honesty, as far as '80s Sabbath is concerned, Eternal Idol features some of Iommi's best riffing. As for Tony Martin, some liked to call him a wannabe Ronnie James Dio, but these people are morons. Tony Martin is Tony Martin - he may have some Ronnie influence in his vocals, but no one else sounds like him. He's an impressively versatile singer who pulls off everything Sabbath throws his way more than well.

So, I loved that album then, but I didn't get hold of the rest of the Martin-era albums until I was 18/19. I remember getting Seventh Star with Glenn Hughes while I was in college, meaning I owned every Sabbath album bar Headless Cross, Tyr, Cross Purposes and Forbidden... ooh I wonder why?!

Basically, I got a full-time job immediately after I finished college when I was 18, got a debit card and immediately went out of my way to try and get those remaining albums online. I remember getting each of my used I.R.S. CD copies of Headless Cross, Tyr and Cross Purposes from Amazon Marketplace all within a short space of time, and each copy cost me between £10 and £12, which was actually pretty decent price-wise. And I remember Forbidden took a little longer to obtain because it's poor reputation amongst the critics made me not prioritise it as highly as the others, but either way I owned my copy at some point by the time I was 19.

Essentially, I've been fans of most of these albums for a good portion of my life (I'm 32 now), and like many of other Sabbath enthusiasts out there, was highly anticipating the release of the Anno Domini box set. Tony Iommi had been teasing it for years, but at the same time Tony Martin was more cynical and had no idea whether or not it was going to happen (if I remember correctly). These albums should always have been readily-available to buy physically as well as to stream, but I suppose legal issues relating to them can really make things difficult. I don't think Iommi was deliberately forgetting about these records, I think it was more a case of it simply not being possible at the time for them to be in print and available to buy. Whatever. It's 2024 and they're back - and rightly so. The box set dropped on the 31st May - I pre-ordered mine (CD version) from HMV when it was officially revealed in March and received it a day early on the 30th May.

The first album in the box set is of course 1989's Headless Cross. This album has been something of a fan-favourite for as long as I can remember, and I firmly agree that it's classic Black Sabbath. In fact, I think this album is absolutely fantastic. Weirdly however, it wasn't until around my mid-20s when I really began to appreciate it's brilliance. I think when I first got hold of the album as an 18 year old, I liked it, but I couldn't quite understand why it was so highly regarded among the die hard Sabbath-heads. Headless Cross' production is totally '80s all over; everything is drenched in reverb and Cozy Powell's drums are absolutely massive. You can compare it to a lot of '80s arena rock, and I suppose I just found it to be a little unsettling when I was younger. I loved Eternal Idol, and I guess the songs on Headless Cross aren't a huge departure either - but the production most definitely is.

One day however, the album just clicked with me. I must've just listened to the whole thing in one go with headphones and absolutely zero distractions. And I can honestly say that the huge '80s production actually works in it's favour, and somehow manages to create an atmosphere across the entire record that is just incredible. The songs are so doomy and atmospheric, yet so soaring and melodic all the same. It's a different sort of doomy; it isn't the spooky kind of doomy that the debut Sabbath album has going for it, nor is it the B-movie comedy horror kind of doom of Born Again. No, it's a majestic kind of doomy. Iommi's riffs are as good ever, but he's not necessarily focussing on heaviness per se. Take a song like the hugely overlooked 'Kill In the Spirit World' - this track is heavy in it's chorus, yet hugely melodic at other times and also moody and dark towards the middle of the song. It has everything you could want from a Sabbath tune.

I think the album's majestic, yet doomy nature is also helped by Tony Martin's incredible vocal performance. He already proved his worth on Eternal Idol, but that record was actually initially written for Ray Gillen to sing over. That never happened of course, and in the end Martin filled the position and sang the words that were given to him. On Headless Cross however, it was his turn to write all the lyrics and sing the songs as he envisioned them. The lyrical matter very much deals with death, the occult and ghost stories, because Martin felt he had to write words of that nature to match the whole Sabbath aura. He didn't of course, because Iommi ended up not being so keen on this approach, but I think fans would agree with me that it was perfect for the album in the end. And as for his actual vocals, Martin really hits the highs when he has to throughout - I really think this might be one of the greatest vocal performances from start to finish on any Sabbath record.

Bill Ward may not be present on drums, but who's really gonna complain when you have Cozy motherfucking Powell behind the kit?! The production combined with Geoff Nicholls' haunting keyboard work is integral to the album's greatness as well. Nicholls had been a background member since Heaven and Hell, performing all keyboards on every album from then onwards (save for 2013's 13) and also providing any keyboards in the live shows from 1980-onward. Headless Cross is the album that really proves how important Nicholls was to the band's sound at this stage in history. Session musician Laurence Cottle recorded all the bass work, and despite never joining the band as an actual member, plays his part on the record and at the end of the day is faultless here.

My favourite tracks have to be the aforementioned 'Kill In the Spirit World' - such a cool song. I also love the massive, soaring title track with Martin's outstanding vocals. The crushing 'Devil and Daughter' features some of my favourite Iommi riffage and is just a song I can listen to over and over and not get bored. 'When Death Calls' is a chilling masterpiece that even boasts some unreal Brian May soloing on it! 'Black Moon' is yet again atmospheric, but it's bluesy pacing is surprisingly groovy and catchy all the same. Meanwhile, 'Nightwing' is a wonderful ballad and a fantastic way to close the album. The only song that isn't quite tip-top for me is 'Call of the Wild', but even this track has it's strengths. I still dig it, totally.

Anno Domini's 2024 remaster of the album sounds as incredible as ever. I don't think it's a particularly big departure from the OG record, I just think the sound has been boosted ever-so-slightly to provide better quality... but it's hard to tell. To be honest, Headless Cross, Tyr and Cross Purposes all sounded good to me in the first place, and these remasters don't bring them down one bit. The real improvement is the new remix of Forbidden, but more about that later. The box set's version of Headless Cross does come with the bonus track 'Cloak and Dagger', originally the b-side to the 'Headless Cross' single. This is another rock-solid tune with a bluesy riff and a vibe that could work on either Eternal Idol or Headless Cross. It's really nice to have it here. 

The next album is 1990's Tyr. This is another album that is beloved by hardcore Sabbath fans... as for me, I really like it. I've always liked it, but now I think it's great. Unfortunately my 2020 review of the album doesn't reflect my thoughts nowadays; I need to re-review Tyr because I'll be scoring it higher than the 7.5/10 I gave it back then (which is still a respectable score anyway). I've been a huge Headless Cross fan for the last 6 or 7 years, but I've only really grown to love Tyr since... well, Anno Domini dropped just last week!! For me, Tyr was comparable to Seventh Star in that it didn't really sound like a Sabbath album at times. The only difference is that Seventh Star was never supposed to be a Sabbath album (it was intended to be Iommi's first solo release) and therefore didn't need to. But then I think of other releases in the discography; oddities like Technical Ecstasy and Never Say Die!, which featured all kinds of weird experimentation, yet almost always get the seal of approval from fans. Why can't Tyr do things differently too?

And in all fairness, the differences are minor. I guess 'The Law Maker' sounds closer to Motorhead musically than it does Sabbath, but is a cool speed metal number regardless. And 'Valhalla' has something of an old-school power metal vibe, but is still a phenomenal song in it's own right. Easily one of the most epic songs Iommi (and to a point, Tony Martin as well) ever penned. The opening harmony vocals of 'Anno Mundi' are definitely unique to this album too; but they're also kind of pretty. And once 'Anno Mundi' gets going, it's a total Sabbath-fest anyway. Some other songs I love from this record are the doom-laden 'The Sabbath Stones', the soaring 'Jerusalem' and the radio-friendly ballad 'Feels Good to Me'. But in reality the whole album is strong from start to finish... but in particular, I think 'Anno Mundi', 'The Sabbath Stones', 'Jerusalem' and 'Valhalla' are outstanding numbers.

One of Tyr's other unique traits is it's lyrics. Tony Martin moved away from the occult references of Headless Cross and delves into Norse mythology in some of these tracks - if you couldn't tell already from song titles such as 'Valhalla', 'Odin's Court', 'The Battle of Tyr' etc., but the album is often mistaken for a concept record, which it isn't. But it's still an interesting side to Sabbath that was never explored before Martin entered the band, and Viking metal was a fully-fledged genre some years later. Tyr is not my favourite album in the box set, but it's album I've come to appreciate even more-so today. I'd easily shift my 7.5/10 rating up to an 8 if I were to re-review it in detail right now.

Regarding 1994's Cross Purposes, this was actually my second favourite of the Tony Martin albums behind The Eternal Idol for a very long time... until I had that sudden revelation in my mid-20s and realised that Headless Cross was actually my favourite, even topping Eternal Idol. I still think I enjoy Cross Purposes just as much as I did to this day however. It's a very well-crafted record and in many ways sounds closer to what you'd expect it to sound like as a Black Sabbath album, if that makes any sense? Like, if I'd never heard a Black Sabbath album from the '90s before, I wouldn't be all that surprised if it sounded like Cross Purposes, but I would be more surprised if it sounded like Tyr. 

Yeah, this album brings much of the doom and gloom back to the band's sound that Tyr was kinda missing. I'm not saying that Tyr needed to be so dark and ominous to in the traditional Black Sabbath sense to be great, I'm just saying that it was in some ways a departure for them musically. Having Geezer Butler back on the bass is probably a large factor in why this album sounds a bit more doomy once again - just listen to the spectacularly moody 'Virtual Death'. This song is about as Sabbath as it gets. Also 'Evil Eye', which manages to sound doomy and groovy all the same... and it even has Eddie Van Halen contributing guitars to it! How cool is that?! I also really dig Iommi's ridiculously catchy riffs in the gritty 'Psychophobia', and the fast opening song 'I Witness' might be my favourite of any of these albums. Maybe! 'The Hand That Rocks the Cradle' is maybe the most '80s-sounding song on the album, and is a kind of ballad/hard rock hybrid, but it breaks up the pacing of the record very nicely. 

Back to Geezer though. It's really nice that he stuck around long enough to record this album, and go out on the tour. According to Tony Martin, Geezer didn't contribute any lyrics, meaning Martin wrote them all. But his bass playing is automatically noticeable from the get-go. No disrespect to Neil Murray, who played bass on Tyr and Forbidden - that man is a legendary bassist in his own right - but Geezer will always be the quintessential Sabbath bass player.

Cross Purposes is, like I said, a bit doomier and more formulaic as a Black Sabbath album, but it still feels like a natural evolution for the band. It couldn't have been made in the '70s with Ozzy, nor could it have come out in the '80s with Dio or Gillan. No, it feels like a '90s Black Sabbath album - but I mean this in the best sense possible, because it's a fine record from start to finish! A few years ago I gave it a slightly higher rating on this blog than I did it's Dio-reunion predecessor, 1992's Dehumanizer. I don't know if I completely agree with that rating right now; some days I'll take Dehumanizer, other days I'll take Cross Purposes. I think the latter is a bit more refined and consistent overall, but I think the best songs on Dehumanizer might be better than the best songs on Cross Purposes. Whatever, both are great! Also nice is the added bonus track, 'What's the Use'. This one is actually a bit faster and upbeat, and would have sounded more at home on an '80s release. But it's a cool song either way.

The final album in the box set is Forbidden from 1995. This is the album that almost always ends up stone dead last on every mainstream music critics' album ranking list (except, surprisingly, for the Guardian. I wrote an article looking at their ranking in 2022), and in general has gathered mixed opinions from the fans. Even the band didn't like it - Ice-T's Body Count guitarist Ernie C was pushed upon Sabbath to produce the record and was the wrong man for the job. Cozy Powell frequently clashed with him as Ernie was supposedly telling him - a highly established rock drummer - how he should play his drums! Meanwhile Tony Martin wasn't even sure if he was going to appear on the finished album, and was not comfortable recording his vocals. As a result of all this, the original Forbidden mix has always been rough-sounding and did not do the songs themselves the justice they deserved.

As far as my own history with this album goes, I, like many others, considered Forbidden to be the band's worst studio release for many years. I bought it when I was 19 and only gave it a few spins. I hated the production, but thought most of the songs were okay (I remember liking 'Get a Grip' a lot, even then)... just an average disc at best. When I re-reviewed it in 2020 during COVID however, it suddenly dawned on me that Forbidden was actually not my least favourite Sabbath record, and the majority of these songs were actually rather good. The production however, I still wasn't convinced by. Cozy's drums - normally thundering - sound so thin and compressed, while Iommi's guitars are murky and buried in the mix. It's just not a good-sounding album, but I'd at least gotten to the point where I could still enjoy the songs, despite the crappy mix.

Fast-forward to 2024 however, and the new Forbidden remix featured within the Anno Domini box set is absolutely awesome. Everything is so clear and powerful now; every single note Iommi plays is now clearly audible and Cozy's drums have been liberated and sound much more like Cozy if 'ya know what I mean. I never really took much issue with Tony Martin's vocals on the original mix, but now they're even clearer, and as a result he just sounds far better for it. You can even make out Neil Murray's bass all the time now. The album is completely transformed because of the fantastic work Iommi and crew have done with this remix. With the exception of the occasional comments I've seen online, it seems to (mostly) be widely accepted that Forbidden in 2024 is the far superior version of the album. But there are still some people out there who, despite liking the album sonically now, will still argue that the songs themselves still aren't up to snuff.

Like I said before however, I actually like pretty much every track on this album. And now I like them even more! Granted, 'The Illusion of Power' is still a somewhat odd way to kick of the record; I do like it overall, but I don't think it'll ever be one of my favourites on the record. It now sounds far doomier, but the lyrics are kinda goofy and the small Ice-T spoken-word segment doesn't add a lot to it. Ice-T's inclusion was massively controversial back in the day, and while I don't think he was necessary to the song, I'm also not one of those idiots that likes to label Forbidden as 'Rap Sabbath'. Ice doesn't even rap, he basically just speaks for 10 seconds, not making or breaking the song. He's just kinda there.

Still, the rest of this album is mostly very good I think. 'Get a Grip' has such a catchy, groovy riff, but is also as heavy as you'd want it to be. I always liked the cartoony music video for it too. And 'Kiss of Death' is just a tremendous song full-stop. It's an outstandingly heavy, dark ballad that also contains of my all-time favourite Iommi riffs - the fast one that comes in around 2 thirds into the song. Sooo cool. I also think the soaring, melodic metaller 'Rusty Angels' is hugely overlooked; I always thought it sounded like a Saxon track with Tony Martin on vocals. It's different for Sabbath, yes, but very strong whichever way I look at it. The title track almost sounds like a Headless Cross leftover, and the new mix makes it sound all the more awesome. Finally, the ballad 'I Won't Cry for You' is hauntingly melancholic, but also hits hard when the big riffs come in. And thanks to the new sonic tones of the record, Forbidden has been promoted from a good album, to a great album for me.

So, the music within Anno Domini is pretty much tip-top then. Headless Cross is and always was a near-perfect Sabbath record, Tyr is a fine follow-up, Cross Purposes is one of the most polished albums they ever made while Forbidden's new remix proves that it was a great album after all. As far as the rest of the box set's contents goes, well, you're getting a 60-page book full of archive interview quotes from Iommi, Martin, Cozy Powell, Neil Murray etc., as well as brand new notes from Iommi and Martin. It's an interesting read, and gives insight into the making of each of these albums, as well as the tours that followed. You also get a reproduction of Headless Cross' tour programme - a nice little bit of history for enthusiasts like myself. Finally, there's a large poster of the Headless Cross artwork. The teenage me would've immediately stuck this straight on my bedroom wall, but I must admit I don't exactly put posters on any of the walls of my house as a 32 year old man these days! It's a good quality poster for sure, but it does baffle me sometimes why record labels put posters in album box sets for bands whose fanbases are mostly going to be made up of older people. Hey-ho.

I think I'm reaching a conclusion now, which is that Anno Domini 1989-1995 is an essential purchase for serious fans, or anyone who never checked out the Tony Martin era (for these people, I also recommend getting the 2010 Deluxe Edition of The Eternal Idol to accompany the box set). It's really nice to see these amazing records alive and well in 2024, and it's also great to have them remastered. My favourite aspect of the box set would be the remix of Forbidden - no, it's still not my favourite album in the set, but it just sounds amazing now either way. Maybe some of the extras within the box could have been different; I'd have much preferred an official Headless Cross t-shirt over a poster, and would happily fork out extra money for this. But I can live with the other contents, and the book is great at least. Cross Purposes Live is missing, but according to a recent interview with Tony Martin, I'm pretty sure he said that album is still in legal limbo, but is not out of the question for a reissue. It'd be nice to see a reissue of said album, 'cos I'm missing it and it sells for crazy prices online.

I like Anno Domini so much that I'm even considering getting the vinyl version of it now. I heard it sold out and is in the works for a second pressing right now... if it's still widely available in a few months time, maybe I'll add it to my vinyl collection too, but right now I'm still satisfied with my CD edition - it sits very nicely among the rest of my collection. So yeah, the music's pretty much a 10/10 for me overall... even if none of the albums are actually 10s, all of them together sort of is, and I can't really explain why! Sorry! The extras within the set are more like a 7 or 8/10, but good stuff either way.

A ramble about CD collecting

Just a ramble about CDs...

2004 was the year I technically began to collect CDs. I have no regrets for choosing CDs as my primary choice of musical format. Vinyl seems to be many peoples' preference these days, but I don't remember the whole vinyl revival happening until around 2010... I could be wrong, but when I take a step back and look at things, I don't remember seeing vinyl LPs in shops again until I'd hit my late teens/early 20s. In fact, where I live in the UK (which is a town with a large population, but not big enough to qualify as a city), I don't remember even having any independent record stores until the mid-2010s. I'm sure we probably did pre-2000, but I was just a kid and didn't start buying albums until I was 12 or 13. And at that time we just had stores like HMV, MVC etc. (in fact, we still have HMV to this day, even if it has relocated about 4 times since I was at school), the kind of shop that would sell plenty of CDs, but I'd hazard a guess they made most of their sales from all the DVDs and video games they also sold.

I don't remember a time when CDs were ever hard to find in stores, but I do quite clearly remember MP3 players and iPods becoming a big deal in my teenage school years. Most of the kids I went to school with weren't really buying CDs... they were downloading MP3 tracks illegally on LimeWire! And I vividly remember a lot people thinking that any kind of physical music format would soon be obsolete and unavailable as new purchases. This thought even crossed my mind a few times, and I was quite fearful of it considering I'd only been collecting a couple of years or so at that point. Of course, CDs never disappeared in the end, but they most definitely were not selling all that well in the mid-2000s, even if they were generally not hard to obtain. Independent record stores were really hard to find outside of big cities then however, like I said.

Anyhow, I started buying CDs for a number of reasons. For starters, I discovered the music I loved and still love to this day of course. It's such a big deal for me personally that I don't think the average person really understands just how important music is to people like me. But anyway, another reason for collecting CDs was also because they were the format most easy to obtain at the time. As stated in the first paragraph, vinyl was wayyy harder to find back then, and cassettes almost impossible by that point. If I'd started with vinyl, I honestly think my collection would only be about 60% the size it is today. Although I do still pick up LPs sometimes, I like to look long and hard in person at their condition before I purchase, whereas brand new vinyl is often absurdly expensive nowadays and I only ever buy them as an occasional treat for myself. The price of a newly-released album in new condition on vinyl is often the price of 3 or 4 brand new copies of the same album on CD. I just can't justify it sometimes.

I will say that I do sometimes really dig dropping the needle on my turntable, and flipping the record over when side 1 is finished - as opposed to simply popping a CD in my player and pressing a button. But I do not necessarily agree with the whole "vinyl sounds better" frame of mind. I do like the little crackles you get sometimes, it gives me more of an organic vibe. But as far maximum sound quality goes, I think CDs are superior. Sometimes I don't want to hear the actual equipment sounds of my stereo/turntable... I just want to hear the music, if that makes any sense!! So vinyl is definitely a mood-dependent kind of format for me.

Ha! I came into this blog post hoping to blindly write about CDs... I wasn't actually intending to debate both vinyl and CD, so I'm gonna try to move back towards general chit-chat about my thoughts and experiences with CDs now.

I think, if you're passionate about certain genres that aren't quite your typical mainstream flavours, CDs (well, or any format for that matter) tend to hold more sentimental value. I mean, when are you ever gonna stumble across, say, a Saxon CD in a charity shop (or thrift store if you're American)?! The answer of course, is never! You'll be flicking through endless Madonna, Ed Sheeran and Adele CDs before you find anything even remotely close to rock... and when you do you'll be lucky to find an Oasis or U2 album. And the funny thing is, while there's a whole load of obscure bands that no one will ever have heard of unless they're passionate about the same music as me, most of my absolute favourite bands are the better-known artists of their genre. Yet I've never seen a Black Sabbath, Deep Purple or Judas Priest CD in a charity shop - ever. And when I do stumble upon used copies in actual record stores, you can betcha they'll be priced much higher than 99p.

Again, independent record stores - they're much easier to find now, and spread out all over the country. My town has had 3 since roughly 2016, and I'd have been overjoyed if any of them had been around during my school years. But obviously I was stuck with the big chain shops for a long time to begin with. And to be fair, they did the job at the time. I didn't start delving into more obscure artists until my late teens, so I'd often be walking home from town with a purchase I was happy with. In fact, I sometimes used to hop on the train to Birmingham in my school years, because their HMV was so much larger and had infinitely more choice of CDs (but almost zero vinyl from what I can recall). By the time I was 18 however, I was a ginormous metalhead and attended Bloodstock Open Air festival for the very first time. I remember coming home from it with a huge stack of hardcore metal CDs, most of which you'd never find in any HMV. Yep, they've always had a big metal market made up of multiple stalls selling merch, vinyl and CDs in the main arena. I've bought a chunk of my discs from Bloodstock.

The biggest and most obvious place to buy CDs is of course, online. I didn't have my own debit or credit cards until was 18 and working full-time... this was a primary reason why I used to visit HMV or MVC for such a long time. Sometimes I'd get my mum to order stuff from Amazon, then pay her back - but I didn't start buying CDs online regularly until I was 18. For a very, very long time I would buy the vast majority of my CDs from Amazon Marketplace. To be honest, unless I'm buying a newly-released album, I never cared if I was buying second-hand or not. As long as the disc was in good condition along with the case and booklet/inlays, I was happy (and saving a hell of a lot money in the process). And I still am... the difference being nowadays is that I very rarely buy anything from Amazon Marketplace anymore. There's a few reasons why I don't buy from them much anymore, the first and most obvious choice being that there seems to be fewer and fewer choice these days when I do look there. Like, I remember there being a huge list of UK sellers selling whatever CD I was interested in, with some crazy cheap offers. Doesn't seem to be the case anymore, unless I'm just not looking at the right CDs?

I gradually shifted to eBay more as the years have passed. At least you can actually see the album you're buying there, and the prices seem to be much cheaper overall. True, you do see those big chain sellers on eBay, and they post stock photos of items rather than the actual thing you're buying - so more often than not I tend to lean more towards smaller sellers and pay that little bit extra for security reasons. But occasionally I will still chance it and buy from the bigger sellers on eBay such as Chalkys or Badlands and 95% of the time all is good. Dispatch and delivery are much slower is all.

A lot of people buy CDs and vinyl from Discogs. I agree that Discogs is brilliant in that you can find almost anything on there. However, I've only bought a few CDs here and there from them, the reason being that there's always a lack of UK sellers. You'll see a disc up for sale at a reasonable asking price from somewhere like the US, but then the postage is so steep that the whole thing doubles in price. I can only assume Discogs is awesome depending on where you live in the world. Unless I'm doing something obviously wrong, as a Brit it's rarely my first choice.

In terms of CD packaging format - jewel case, digipak etc., I'm gonna say that my favourite will always be the simple jewel case. They're clean, the booklet slots in nicely and if you look after and store them properly they last forever. I can't stand those thin, flimsy cardboard sleeves that replicate LPs, but I do kinda like some of the digipaks in my collection - if done correctly that is. And I really do like those book format CDs. For example, the Deluxe edition version of the newly released Invincible Shield by Judas Priest - very nice. When I'm just sat staring at my collection (which is probably more often than I should!), I sometimes just randomly grab the fancier packaged albums for a looksee. Weirdly, being able to clearly read the side of each album is a big deal for me, hence why I like jewel cases and not thin cardboard sleeves. Although I will say that every so often you'll find a jewel case with the side text facing the opposite direction, reading upwards instead of downwards - and it annoys me... it must be a weird OCD quirk of mine!

I also quite like box sets, although I don't own too many. Some are small enough to fit in alongside all my regular discs, others are huge and are stored on a shelf. I don't often go out of my way to buy box sets in truth - I tend to pick them up if they're too good to miss or if they're priced very reasonably - but I do think they're neat more often than not. I love my 30th Anniversary Super Deluxe box set of Def Leppard's Hysteria, for instance. It's a thing of beauty, and packed full of cool shit. I've also pre-ordered the recently-announced Black Sabbath box set, Anno Domini 1989-1995. It's been in talks for years now, and it's finally being released at the end of May this year. Yeah, I've owned all the albums inside it forever, but the Tony Martin era is hugely underrated, I'm a die hard Sabbath fan and it also comes with the newly-remixed Forbidden, which I'm dying to hear. So yeah.

Like vinyl, a lot of CDs have various different releases throughout their history. When it comes to original releases, remasters, deluxe versions etc., I can't really say I have a specific preference. Sometimes original releases can sound better, other times I like the remaster. For example, those 2004 Megadeth remixes of their older albums are horrible in comparison to their original counterparts. Every fan knows this. But then you've a remaster like Iggy Pop's 1997 remix of the Stooges' Raw Power, which absolutely slays it's original mix by David Bowie. For the most part however, I think the vast majority of remasters are just fine when it comes to CDs, but I normally don't prioritise one or the other; if I end up with an older pressing over a remaster, then that's fine by me. And vice versa of course.

Obviously some reissues/special editions come with bonus tracks or even a bonus disc. I love it when unreleased studio tracks are featured as bonus songs - even if they aren't great, at least they're polished. What I'm not so keen on are demo tracks thrown in as bonus songs. Only in very rare circumstances are demo cuts better than their finished studio counterparts. They can be interesting, I'll give them that. But sometimes you'll buy a deluxe edition of an album, and the entire bonus disc is full of demos and outtakes. For example, a few years ago I bought the 2009 deluxe edition of Black Sabbath's self-titled debut, to go alongside my old standard copy which I've had forever. The bonus disc is made up entirely of studio outtakes, alternative versions and instrumentals of the tracks from the finished album. I think I listened to it once, and I don't think I ever will again. What I like as bonus material is more original studio songs (as I said), live tracks or even re-recordings of oldies to hear them from a modern perspective.

I gotta admit, I don't really know where I'm going with this post... I guess I just wanted to talk about CDs and my association with them. I'm just glad they never went away, despite everything that's happened in the last 20 or so years - MP3s, iPods, streaming services... nope, CDs are still here and alive and well at that. And if you look in the right places, I don't think the prices have even changed all that much - unlike vinyl. Cassettes have also made a comeback which I think is cool as hell even if I have no interest in ever collecting them. Either way, I'm quite happy with the number of CDs in my collection now. It'll never be big enough of course, but the 15 year old me would pass out if he saw the collection I've amassed now that I'm 31 (almost 32).