I really appreciate the kind comments, it is very flattering. I don;t expect people will necessarily agree but I hope I made my reasoning clear. Well I had better, what with all I typed And yes, the subject of Metallica is no doubt a very personal one. To weigh in on a couple of questions:


1. As far as I can tell there is no true connection. Their earlier material was not concept-album stuff but most of the songs seemed to have a common vibe, something the band has acknowledged. I don't sense that here so if there is a theme here it went over my head.

2. Under Bob Rock the band starting doing their songwriting in the studio, something Rubin put a stop to. I think Rock's influence is pretty definite and can be heard throughout the Black Album (and later releases) but I do not anything more anecdotal to add to that, I'm afraid. There are a number of songs on that album which now, looking back, I could actually see them doing, but songs like "Don't Tread on Me" and "Nothing Else Matters" really don't fit in a natural progression. I think Rock also was responsible for the stark increase in backing vocals. That's straight out of the place he was when he produced Bon Jovi.

3. I have to be honest and say that every band you listed is a perfect example of what happens when musicians hang around too long. We may just have to disagree on that one. But what I was saying is that there is no reproduce the same angst you have when you are 20 years old and literally do not care if the earth swallows you up versus having kids and having success for a large part of your career. You can still make good music, and it can still be anxious sounding and aggressive, but it will never have that same sense of desperate passion. None of us really can do this. Since Metallica was trying to channel a previous version of themselves, they opened themselves up to that kind of observation. On the other side of the coin, some of the passages and nuances in the songs could not have been created by that younger Metallica. Experience has its place too.

Bob Rock helped (and it's not all his fault....because without their allowing it it wouldn't have happened) change them from one of the pioneers of genre(s) into just another Power Rock/Ballad band in it for the benjamins....he also pretty much eliminated the lead guitar position. I am not even sure WTF? Kirk bothered to show up for St. Anger's sessions?

When you take into account how little the bass has been heard on Metallica recordings since Cliff Burton's death (with the ultimate WGAF about the bass of having Bob Rock playing bass)....he turned them even more into a duo....with anyone else in the band basically as session players....as in, Pink Floyd.

From what I've heard Metallica wanted Bob Rock as producer not because of commercial success, but because of the production results of Mötley Crüe's Dr Feelgood. That was the sound Hetfield and Ulrich wanted to have on their next album. Just BTW, Bob Rock would work with Bon Jovi after the Black Album, as lead producer anyway.

Satchmo is once again implying that every band with a prodution sound similar to Bob Rock/Bruce Fairbairn albums is in it for cash. Ever considered that those bands might primarily aiming for a high quality production? Why not hire someone who can do a better (or musically more satisfying) job as producer than most? Why did Iron Maiden stick with Martin Birch for most of their carreer? And Judas Priest with Tom Allom? Or ZZ Top with Bill Ham?
Bands will stick with producers for that long simply because of the musical results. If it was a commercial matter, then there wouldn't be a need to hire the same producer again after the first bigseller record.
The Duo of Bruce Fairbairn and Bob Rock can deliever a special unique sound no one else can, at least I haven't heard it yet. Yes, it seemed to work very well commercially too for about ten years, but that only proves that the albums they produced during that era were exceptionally hooking not to say good, which is the result not only of exceptional production but especially songwriting and band performance.

Eliminating the lead guitar, hm. Not a musician, but my two cents are that Hammet never really provided a reason to listen to two-minute solos. Many of his solos on the pre-Black Album records are way too long and boring if you ask me. Things might be different if they had a better and more interesting guitarist in the band, but they don't.

As far as Metallica being a duo, that was not Bob Rock's idea, it has been like that since day one. At least since the first album. Ever since Mustaine left it was going to be obvious who would be calling the shots. Hetfield/Ulrich write all the songs, and they are the kind of characters that just lead a team. The other two just ran along and were happy to do so. When Newsted arrived he couldn't (or wasn't allowed to) contribute much to the songwriting either, even though he used to be a main composer in his previous band (Flotsam & Jetsam, which totally sucked IMO).
Constellations like that can be seen in many bands. Aerosmith is a two-man show, Bon Jovi is (just using them as an example), AC/DC just the same. It just seems to work for them that way.

bravo seerix! i need to improve my english.