thrash debuts not good??!!!

Bryant said:
Hmm...... are you saying you like "Show No Mercy" ? :loco:


Bryant

I see your point on that....But hear's a weird thought. Imagine if Show no mercy was Slayers ONLY album. You would still regard it as a kickass album wouldn't you. And you would still respect the band even for that one album.

But, fuck, come on SNM compared to HA or RIB...gimme a break!!
 
Captain_Steel said:
I see your point on that....But hear's a weird thought. Imagine if Show no mercy was Slayers ONLY album. You would still regard it as a kickass album wouldn't you. And you would still respect the band even for that one album.

But, fuck, come on SNM compared to HA or RIB...gimme a break!!

Ha ha ha I think you misunderstood my reply. I wasn't picking at the release, but to a poster here who doesn't like Slayer. As far as my opinion of Slayer, I like most of their releases and love "Seasons." I am happy to see some opinions here though. I'll give you that evil little icon for that......
:wave:


Bryant
 
I had to bring this up again as I seem to have been the root of all this evil, hehehe. I never said that all Thrash debuts are weak or anything. Actually I have never thought about looking at debuts any different than at any other following album. It's not like there's a albums-2-&-3-rule-the-rest-is-crap-rule. Take Annihilator - they still have to top Alice In Hell for me. All I said is that in my opinion Kreators EP album is of demo quality at best. Sure, Flag Of Hate is a killer tune but there are so many fillers on that album that it doesn't even reach an average level in my book. :erk: Just my opinion.
 
The problem is everyone is comparing a thrash band's debut to their later work.. what I think we should do is evaluate the debut album by itself and not compare it to any other album by the band.. was it a strong debut or not? .. simple as that and not really judge the production of it because the production is pretty much tied into cold hard cash.. if you dont have enough of it you wont be able to make the production any better.. studio time is money.. once the money runs out no more studio time and you release what you have thats already done.. anyways all the bands that people have mentioned on this thread in my opinion had very strong debuts... some bands that werent mention that I will are Sacred Reich, Crumbsuckers, Nuclear Assault, D.R.I. (the Crossover album because their debut wasnt really thrash so CRossover is their thrash debut to me), Pantera, Holy Terror, Sepultura, Sodom, Destruction etc. (some skip my mind at the present time) and if you want to compare debuts to a band's later efforts.. ill take Kill Em All over anything after 1988.. :wave:
 
I disagree concerning some of these bands, especially Artillery for which I prefer by far their later stuff :p But that's just me.

Nice to see Protector in your list though :headbang: Their first EP was awesome!
 
Sorry to say this but your statements remind me a bit of those stubborn narrow-minded people who consider themseves to be real die hards and will bash anything a band puts out after their debut. A band can be as good as possible but still they will rate their early stuff higher. I'm not saying you guys are such people but come on: Beneath The Remains and Arise are weaker than Bestial Devastaion and Morbid Visions? Endless Pain better than Extreme Aggresssion? Persecution Mania worse than In The Sign Of Evil? Gimme a break!
 
Come on guys, nothing is tr00 anymore after the first rehearsal demo tape!!




Just kiddin' of course.

I can fully understand what Erik says, some raw debut albums have a special charm. Even if like Sarge I usually prefer mid-career Sodom, Kreator, Sepultura, etc.
 
Well, I think I got the idea you're trying to get across. Naivety can improve the atmosphere of a record, yes. There's no doubt about it. But it's one thing to have your naivety add some extra flavor to your music and another one to let it bury your musical ideas by lack of skills. And that's what happened IMO on Endless Pain, Bestial Devastation and In The Sign Of Evil. Besides even Mille, Max Cavalera and Tom Angelripper admitted that they weren't good musicians at all in their early days. I don't say that the songs are bad. Not at all! But I'd always pick the re-recorded versions of Flag Of Hate and Outbreak Of Evil or the live version of Necromancer instead of the originals. They're played tighter, sound better and rock harder. Sorry guys, I just can't help it. But like I said before, there are examples of Thrash bands who have yet to top their debuts even in my book; e.g. Annihilator and Exhorder. Before the release of The Gathering I had also put Testament in that category.
 
Just to get one thing straight from the start - it was never my intention to offend anybody. :wave: You probably haven't felt offended anyway but I really wanted to make this clear. The thing is that I'm really tired of all those wannabes who keep bashing anything after a band's debut. I just can't figure out the sense in doing so. If you know you won't like the new album why bothering with it? Why don't they spend their money on some demos instead? See what I mean? I just doesn't make any sense at all!
I can't say anything about Sabbat as I've never even heard just one of their songs. As for the rest I suppose we agree to disagree then. I've always looked at Kreator, Sodom, Sepultura and Destruction to have had very similar starts. Thats why I threw in their names. And in my opinion all of their debuts were kinda weak compared to their later efforts. Although I want to add that I like them all to some extent. Some more, some less. Might not be the actual debuts but I really LOVE Sodom's first full-blown LP Obsessed By Cruelty and also I like Sepultura's Morbid Visions and Destruction's Infernal Overkill albums very much. With Kreator's Endless Pain album it's different though. It was a terribly rushed matter and I think you can hear.