Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Music Talk
Reload this Page >

The official St. Anger review and thoughts thread!!

Music Talk Discuss music in all its forms: CD, MP3, DVD-A, SACD and of course live
View Poll Results: How is St. Anger?
***** Must Have: A classic
8
10.13%
**** Excellent
9
11.39%
*** Good
14
17.72%
** Fair
11
13.92%
* Poor
37
46.84%
Voters: 79. You may not vote on this poll

The official St. Anger review and thoughts thread!!

Old 06-07-03, 07:57 PM
  #76  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: IL
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I like the song "St. Anger" but this album can be summed up
quite easily.

A lack of melodies and choruses.

grade: C
Frank TJ Mackey is offline  
Old 06-07-03, 09:13 PM
  #77  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 15,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So far after about 4 listens, I can say this is a bad.ass.album!! To be honest after the first listen I wasnt sure about it, but now its just starting to come together. Just ballzy metal! I love it. No fancy production, just a raw unpolished Metallica sound. Its a shame many people are giving up on this record so fast. awesome, awesome album!

[james voice] YEAHHHH!! [/james voice]
MJKTool is offline  
Old 06-07-03, 09:29 PM
  #78  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
B5Erik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 9,630
Received 32 Likes on 27 Posts
I can't believe how bad this album is.

HALF of the problem is the HORRIBLE production. You can have "raw" production that still sounds good. The snare drum sounds like a freaking trash can lid. HORRIBLE. The guitars are buried in the mix, and have a horrible muddy tone that makes it almost impossible to make out some of the more complex guitar parts.

The OTHER HALF of the problem are the vocal melody lines. Some of them work, but some of them are just awful, completely unmusical.

This would have been a waste of ten bucks, but the DVD saves the album. The DVD versions are MUCH better.

I'd still only rate it a 4.5 out of 10.
B5Erik is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 01:11 AM
  #79  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just got it today. After hearing St. Anger on the radio a few weeks ago, I wasn't impressed. But after listening to the album version, it grew on me. Four songs in, I knew I was going to like the album. I think the production could use some work (that damn drum really sticks out like a sore thumb), but overall definitely more of a natural progression from the Black album, or even Justice, skipping over Loan and Re-Load. I like the fact that Jaymz is screaming a little bit again.
Scorpio is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 02:07 AM
  #80  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is there any discussion on the fact that it won't play in a PC? I'm planning on returning it tomorrow because I use my laptop right now as my primary music-listening device...er.
SirPablo is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 02:31 AM
  #81  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 15,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by SirPablo
Is there any discussion on the fact that it won't play in a PC? I'm planning on returning it tomorrow because I use my laptop right now as my primary music-listening device...er.
Plays fine on my PC. I'm loving the "Metallica Vault" access that came with the CD.
MJKTool is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 03:11 AM
  #82  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: IL
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The main reason that I still like Metallica is because of
James Hetfield.

He doesn't sing on this record at all.

I'm not saying I want an album full of ballads... but come on.
Frank TJ Mackey is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 06:04 AM
  #83  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Giantrobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South Bay
Posts: 57,924
Received 46 Likes on 32 Posts
I just saw the St Anger video this am and I must admit I like it.

Great song very cool video
Giantrobo is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 01:12 PM
  #84  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Chalk up another vote for poor from me. Love Metallica. Hate this album. About all I can say, as I don't like to trash my favorite band, but this album sucks...
SuprVgeta is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 02:27 PM
  #85  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just got the album today. Very raw sounding, excellent overall. Not their best, but this is a Metallica album, make no mistake. Very happy about it, been a while, but I'd say it was worth the wait. Great packaging BTW.

I don't see how the quality of the sound is poor at all though. . .to each his own I guess, but I listened to this in the car and now on headphones, and I don't see what the fuss regarding the poor quality is.
theneobez is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 07:46 PM
  #86  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
B5Erik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 9,630
Received 32 Likes on 27 Posts
The snare drum LITERALLY sounds like a trash can lid.

On a couple of the songs the drum keeps ringing incessantly (the ring of the metal snare drum never stops ringing because he's hitting it so often - so almost all you hear is this metal reverberation ringing throughout - totally annoying).

This is the worst produced album I've ever heard - and I've heard a lot of albums.

The DVD sounds better on most of the songs, but he's still using a metal snare. Fortunately, the live mix tends to drown out some of that ringing of the metal drum.

And the songs are just OK at best.

I'm willing to bet that the new Iron Maiden will be much MUCH better.
B5Erik is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 08:40 PM
  #87  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Chicago
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Below is an interesting review/look at it from a different perspective. But first, I personally don't like the production at all. I understand the intent, but the cd doesn't beg for repeated listening. The dvd on the other hand is much better. The live audio is light years better and you still maintain the intent IMO.


From the afternoon DJ at www.ROCK1057.net (named whiplash)

Metallicaís St. Anger is 75 minutes of aggression, violence, chaos and brutality. Itís an electrical meltdown wrapped inside a nuclear explosion surrounded by a 500 mile earthquake. On this, we all concur.

From here, we become less agreeable...

After listening to the album twice in its entirety, Iíll state my conclusion now...then spend several paragraphs explaining it...then Iíll state the conclusion again:

This is either the worst dumpster-full of rotten, spoiled garbage Metallica has ever writtenÖor itís brilliantly groundbreaking. But there is no middle ground. This album isnít "okay." After hearing it twice, it either sucks or itís phenomenal.

I suppose Iíll begin by touching on - and agreeing with - all the negatives about which Iíve heard others chanting. First, someone wake up Kirk Hammett and tell him his bandís recording a new album. His alarm clock has been broken for the last 6 months. Whereís Kirk! Youíve got (arguably) the greatest metal guitarist plugging in next to you, and as a reward for all his years of jaw-dropping, neck-shredding, light speed distorted dominance, you give him a grand total of... ZERO solos? What the f*** guys? In every song, thereís at least 2 places where Kirk could just lift off...but we get nothing. Maybe it was Kirkís decision...in which case he should be flogged. Maybe it was Bob Rockís decision...in which case he should be drawn and quartered. Most likely it was a collective decision. Now since we canít execute the whole quartet, Iíll guess Iíll just shake my head and move on.

Secondly, everyone complains about the quality...the production...the mixing...the overall Bob Rocked sound on the record. I agree with the criticisms. St. Anger sounds like it was recorded for less than $1,000 on an 8 track in my friendís sheet metal garage. Maybe Lars really is broke from Napster, but donít Metallica have access to a multi-million dollar recording studio with top notch equipment and an unlimited budget? And letís be honest about Bob Rock...the guy knows his stuff. Dr. Feelgood sounded great. The Black Album was amazingly produced. Bob didnít suddenly go deaf. You have to believe it was intentional...but why? Iíll get to my theoryÖ

Also, in the mix, the drums are WAY too loud. All you can hear is Lars banging on that tin can. The guitars (what little there are) are buried behind "Tama garage fury," as I will now call it.

As for Jamesí vocals...theyíre rough. Theyíre raw. It sounds like he did one take and kept it no matter how it sounded. No overdubs, either. I remember watching A Year & a Half in the Life Of...which documented the recording of the Black Album...and Bob Rock made James sing "...and I dub thee Unforgiven" about 40 different times, keeping every take and overdubbing those vocals until they sounded thick and perfect. What a difference 12 years makes... James is thin, often out-of-key, often missing notes, his voice cracks occasionally. I almost started laughing during the Frantic-tic-tic-tock part of that song it was so out-of-key and warbling.

And as for the songs themselves...everyone Iíve talked to says the same thing: "the whole album is the same, repetitive song." Itís true, all the songs sound alike. And yes, all the songs are repetitive, lyrically and musically. The songwriting and arrangement are incredibly subpar compared to past Metallica efforts. Random, pointless time changes litter St. Anger. And several of the songs even start out in the tradition of newer hard rock songs, meaning they play the riff softly, then break into it hardcore. (Think Linkin Parkís One Step Closer or Godsmackís I Stand Alone.) Itís very typical and, therefore, uncharacteristic of Metallica.

I think thatís about it, right? Have I covered all the reasons why most people think this album tanks?

Alright, now for the flipside...think about this...

Lars warned us for weeks that this record would blow our minds. Critics who heard it early said it was commercial suicide. They would lose all their new Black Album and beyond fans, and their old school fans would be jaded by the lack of creativity, harmony, and guitar solos that were so prevalent on the first 3 albums. Critically, Metallica couldnít win. Weíve heard this for months.

My first point: we shouldnít ACT so surprised with what we hear. That said, itís easy to say "oh, yeah...Iím ready for anything," and then youíre presented with St. Anger and your preparation goes out the dirty window because you canít believe your ears.

But hereís my big theory on why this album just might be brilliance in disguise...

Metallica have always been anti-glam. Lars has always described them as the anti-Motley Crue. Theyíve always gone against the grain, forcing their heaviness down the pop-driven throat of the world. But remember in the late 80s and early 90s when glam was at its peak? Bands like the Crue, Skid Row, Posion, etc. ruled the music scene with their sex, drugs and party attitude accompanied by their teased hair, caked make-up, spandex, leather, lipstick and enough hairspray to make any drag queen proud.

At the time, that was the standard, and everyone did itÖ

Then along came a band wearing flannel. Their lead singer couldnít sing like Sebastian Bach. He looked liked a bum. His name was Kurt. He didnít use hairspray. He had a band called Nirvana. They could rock too, but they said the hell with this false image. They stripped everything down...naked...rock n roll, depressing lyrics and ripped clothes. And grunge was born.

Ten years later, Nirvana is credited with launching a revolution and igniting the hairspray into a flaming glam-wildfire...

So what has happened in the 10 years post-Nirvana? Other bands have come and gone. Grunge had its run. Then when hip-hop took off, suddenly rap rock was thrust upon us...Rage Against the Machine. Kid Rock. Limp Bizkit. 311. Technology improved dramatically. Bands like these started using turntables in their sets and on their albums. More crazy sound effects were incorporated in hard rock. Nine Inch Nails, Marilyn Manson and Rob Zombie pioneered the industrial techno-metal. Korn uses drum machines on their albums. Itís all programmed to sound perfect. Other metal outfits like Iron Maiden and Iced Earth use big orchestras, pianos, voice distortions. Linkin Park uses the digital muting and computerized beats. Guitars are compressed, vocals are overdubbed. Itís technology gone wild to produce the most "perfect-sounding" rock records possible.

At this time, it is the standard, and everyone does it...

Then along comes a band we know very well. Theyíve gone through a lot in the past few years. Theyíve lost their bassist. Theyíve been tangled in unpopular lawsuits. Their front man was in rehab for alcoholism. They can still rock too...but they said the hell with this false image that "hi-tech is best." So they stripped everything down...naked...heavy metal, angry lyrics. Raw. No technology. No effects. No orchestra. No drum machine. No vocal overdubs. And St. Anger was born.

They say things move in cycles. In Ď83, Kill ĎEm All wasnít popular. It was raw. It was basic thrash metal. Very good thrash metal...but it was simple. Now in Ď03, twenty years later, Metallica have gone full circle. St. Anger is simple. And although not as creative as the debut, itís more like that record than any other.

So by this analogy (the same way that Nirvana was anti-glam, St. Anger is anti-technology), is Metallicaís new CD fresh and ground-breaking? Or is it more a return to roots? Given the cyclic nature of things, can it be both?

If this album is brilliant, itís because it was written by a band that could have done something else. They have the money. They have the talent. They have the resources and the best producer in the world. They CHOSE to make St. Anger the way it is, and they did it on purpose. They see how hi-tech hard rock and heavy metal is becoming...so they put out a record that was completely the opposite. They put out a record that was about music...about feelings...about deep emotions. Not one about how many cool samples and effects we can mix together with our budget. St. Anger is a human record. Itís raw. Itís imperfect. Itís real. Itís...human.

Isnít it refreshing to hear a human record in such a computerized world?

I think so...

And the more I think about it, the more this idea seems brilliantly groundbreaking. Maybe the songs themselves arenít spectacular, but the POINT they make, from their production quality to their content give the album an amazing cohesion...a unity that gives modern techo-rock the finger. Actually, St. Anger pretty much gives everything the finger.

But hereís the kicker...

It could be said that any garage band from Peoria could make a record that sounds like the new Metallica CD. Why arenít they considered groundbreaking in their stripped-down, simple philosophy? Well, because our Peoria garage band is poor. Their record HAS to sound naked. And they have no history. Metallica has 20 years of legacy and expectations. And for Metallica to do this by choice, gives the idea its appeal. It had to be the right band at the right time...and Metallica stepped up to the plate to carry the torch.

So if Iím right...if this album is brilliant, does it represent the future of hard rock? Will it have that much influence? Or does the public still want more years of super techo computerized ultra produced rock that showcases megabytes and digitalia instead of talent and songwriting?

I donít know...

Now the conclusion again. This album is either a serious mistake and the biggest load of crap Metallica ever penned...or itís brilliant and could change the sound of hard rock for the next 10 years.

Think about it...Iím gonna go listen to the CD again because I have a feeling it's really, really good.



Whiplash
Hannibal is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 09:07 PM
  #88  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 15,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Great read, thanks Hannibal
MJKTool is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 09:08 PM
  #89  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Marquette, MI
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I second that. Great article.
fleegs is offline  
Old 06-08-03, 10:46 PM
  #90  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
B5Erik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern California
Posts: 9,630
Received 32 Likes on 27 Posts
They could have still gotten the same effect if they had a DECENT drum & guitar sound and a DECENT mix. Not high tech, not big budget, but a GOOD low budget mix. A GOOD raw mix.

St. Anger is BAD production, even for raw production. I do my own recordings, and they sound WAY better, and I've just got a $1200 8 track home studio.

The songs? They're OK. The music is good - very good in spots, but the vocal lines are either good or they're crap, and it varies even within the same song.

So add the HORRIBLE production (and the WORST snare drum sound I've ever heard, even demo's from 80's unsigned thrash bands had better snare sounds) to the hit or complete miss vocal parts and you've got an extremely disappointing album.

Last edited by B5Erik; 06-09-03 at 10:37 AM.
B5Erik is offline  
Old 06-09-03, 01:52 AM
  #91  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
gerrythedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Inglewood, Ca.
Posts: 7,055
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
some 411 for ya [ST ANGER] from METALLICA

All the songs were created during lengthy jam sessions at Metallica's headquarters. No one was allowed to bring in any material of his own. After each session, Ulrich and Rock sat at the computer, molding the best bits into songs.

Primary lyricist Hetfield then added the words, with help from his bandmates. Sober and relaxed, he bares his soul in such songs as the title track ("I want my anger to be healthy") and "Dirty Window" ("I drink from the cup of denial, judging the world from my throne").

Perhaps more worrisome for aficionados is the absence of guitar solos. Ulrich says the band tried desperately to add overdubs, but they ended up "cheapening" the sound.


[gerrythedon]... I think this album is awesome [except "SWEET AMBER (don't like at all)] If ya like it cool ya understand if not cool [better have a GOOD opinion, cuzz so far I'm just laughin' at some] so at least read LARS final words... I'm not WALKIN' AWAY!

"If people don't like the fact that that's what it is now, then at least respect it and then walk away from it gracefully." [LARS ULRICH]

parts from AOL NEWS
gerrythedon is online now  
Old 06-09-03, 11:20 AM
  #92  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
mdc3000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Posts: 9,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by SirPablo
Is there any discussion on the fact that it won't play in a PC? I'm planning on returning it tomorrow because I use my laptop right now as my primary music-listening device...er.
It also plays fine here... maybe something was screwed up with your comp... or are you talking about the dvd not playing right on your comp? Because I haven't checked out the dvd in a rom, but the CD plays no problem.

MATT
mdc3000 is offline  
Old 06-09-03, 11:59 AM
  #93  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 7,534
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I just burned the DVD audio to a CDR and that will be the version of "St. Anger" that I listen to.

Is it just me or does the video for "St Anger" (the one on MTV) have a way different mix than the album? The video's mix is EVEN worse than the album (maybe it's my TV's speaker). There seems to be no guitars on the video at all! And that damn drum is even more annoying than the album version.
nodeerforamonth is offline  
Old 06-09-03, 12:09 PM
  #94  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I also burned the DVD audio to CD. Amazingly coincidental that it's about 80 minutes long, the length of a typical CD-R.

-HM
Hollow Man is offline  
Old 06-09-03, 12:41 PM
  #95  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,865
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote from METALLICA:
"All the songs were created during lengthy jam sessions at Metallica's headquarters. No one was allowed to bring in any material of his own. After each session, Ulrich and Rock sat at the computer, molding the best bits into songs."


So now everyone should understand why the music is crap. There are no real songs here, but just bits and pieces of "jam sessions". Who the heck decided THAT would be a good idea?

Quote from the above article:
"What a difference 12 years makes... James is thin, often out-of-key, often missing notes, his voice cracks occasionally. I almost started laughing during the Frantic-tic-tic-tock part of that song it was so out-of-key and warbling. "


I feel the same way...except i DID laugh during parts of some of the new songs.
Zodo is offline  
Old 06-09-03, 01:03 PM
  #96  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think that the review from Whiplish was interesting, and I agree with a lot of it, except how this record might be groundbreaking. The music just isn't unique enough.

Apparently he thought he was listening to Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols. There's an album that had the lousy production, but more importantly, musically it had never been done before.

-HM
Hollow Man is offline  
Old 06-09-03, 06:09 PM
  #97  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Whereís Kirk! Youíve got (arguably) the greatest metal guitarist
plugging in next to you, and as a reward for all his years of jaw-dropping,
neck-shredding.........

Wow! Talk about an overstatement. Kirk Hammett is an average metal guitarist (soloist) at best. Listen to George Lynch, Ronni LeTekro, Zack Wylde, Tony Macalpine, Paul Gilbert, Greg Howe etc...
And you'll realize what a hack Kirk really is. Cliched, unimaginitive, relying on his wah wah too much and seemingly suffering from tired blood.
His lead work on 'Lightning' and 'Puppets' were his shining moments, but he hasn't improved or opened any eyes in quite some time. He is the weak link in Metallica and has been for many years.
Just my two cents.
Oh and St. Anger is solid but hardly a masterpiece....
Father Merrin is offline  
Old 06-09-03, 06:43 PM
  #98  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here is something that someone wrote in the Metal Sludge mail bag found at http://www.metal-sludge.com

Dear Metal-Sludge:
First of all, I guess that props are in order for laying it all on the table in your review of St. Anger. It was refreshing to come out and say "We're never going to do any business with Metallica anyway, so we might as well be honest." As usual, you far outstrip most other media outlets in the credibility department (though I think you were a little off in putting Rolling Stone in your list of corporate shills - they've been harsh to many a giant band). Personally, however, I love "St. Anger," but admit to being one of those oft-despised "Metallica lifers" that would buy a spoken-word CD of James reading from the nursery rhymes of Mother Goose. So rather than start going off about how you guys are idiots and other useless crap that you've probably gotten since the St. Anger review, I thought I might offer something that you (and possibly the readers of the site) might find more interesting. After all, we've all heard the same tired pro and con Metallica arguments a million times before. Instead, I've got this:

5 Ways for Metallica to Follow Up "St. Anger"

1. Don't wait 6 years for the follow up. The delay between "Reload" and "St. Anger" is understandable, what with touring, Jason leaving, and King James going into rehab. "St. Anger" was a necessary regrouping effort, well worth the wait in my opinion, but now that Metallica is purporting to have their proverbial **** together, no more than 2 years should go by without a new album. This album is getting strong response from fans and critics, the Summer Sanitarium tour is going to be huge, Robert is fitting in, and St. Anger will be platinum several times over. The band is rejuvenated, so don't kill the momentum by pulling an Axl. Keep the train rolling.

2. Actually produce the follow-up record. This "stripped-down" sound was kind of a neat idea for this one. "We're regrouping, we're getting back to basics, we're just gonna shred our instruments and kick your ass that way." It works this time around. But the next one could benefit from Bob Rock's crunch and the fuller sound he provides. At least get rid of that snare ping, which I am only now starting to get used to. Either way, some cool echoes and reverbs and such from the studio could bring the Metallica sound to a better place for the next step.

3. Let Kirk do his thing. The guy is a certified guitar god, and he kicks ass. I think the most glaring weakness of St. Anger is the lack of a Hammett solo. One of the best ways to tell these nu-metal whining kiddies to **** off is show them how it's done, and that's by putting some some honest-to-goodness metal solos in there. Just make sure Kirk leaves the wah-wah pedal at home.

4. Cut back on the introspective lyrics. A certain amount of introspection is a mark of maturity, and the therapy-driven lyrics of St. Anger are an essential part of this chapter in the Metallica catalogue. For James to deny his tribulations on this anticipated album would be dishonest. They're expressed well here, and satisfying to listen to. However, I'm a total sucker for the songwriting of old, when they wrote songs about Biblical plagues, H.P. Lovecraft, war, and dipshit televangelists. So externalize a bit on the next one. Attack things.

5. And finally, tell MTV to take a flying **** at the moon. Metallica's bigger than MTV, and they don't need them. Tour, give interviews, that kind of thing. Make a neat video ("St. Anger" is a SWEET one) and let MTV play it, but don't pander. Just say "We're Metallica. We're releasing a new album. Ignore it at your peril, ass clowns." That's how Metallica becomes its own entity again.
cerial442 is offline  
Old 06-10-03, 10:54 AM
  #99  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Back in the 802, missing NYC
Posts: 5,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by nodeerforamonth
I just burned the DVD audio to a CDR and that will be the version of "St. Anger" that I listen to.

i would like to do this, but i don't know how. do i need a cd burner or a dvd burner?

thanks.
db27 is offline  
Old 06-10-03, 11:49 AM
  #100  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Chicago
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Funny man, esp the second.

http://www.guitar.com/cda/discuss/re...3064107&sPath=
http://www.guitar.com/cda/discuss/re...sageID=3055614
Hannibal is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.