Buy for
$14.73
(9 items)

Release date: 22 February 1986
Style: Heavy metal

Rating:

7.8 | 277 votes

Owners:

378 have it
24 want it
1 trades it


01. The Ultimate Sin
02. Secret Loser
03. Never Know Why
04. Thank God For The Bomb
05. Never
06. Lightning Strikes
07. Killer Of Giants
08. Fool Like You
09. Shot In The Dark

Lyrics (9)


Line-up
Ozzy Osbourne - vocals
Jake E. Lee - guitars
Randy Castillo - drums
Phil Soussan - bass, backing vocals

Guest musicians
Mike Moran - keyboards


Additional info
Produced and engineered by Ron Nevison.
Assistant engineering by Richard Moake and Martin White.
Cover art and photography by Boris Vallejo, Ria Lewerke and Mark Weiss.

Found in 8 lists
Top lists

RaduP Black Sabbath, Ozzy And Dio And Co. - Best To Worst  | #27
Tristus Scriptor Some Sadly Overlooked Gems  | #1
anathema_1977 All Metal Of All Time Top 200: Albums  | #168
Mrtvozornik Top 20 Heavy Metal Albums Of 1986  | #20
DeathWings Best Albums '80-'90  | #112
metalwolf666 The Most Underrated Albums  | #5
TauSigmaNova My Favorite Albums By Year  | #57
metalwolf666 My Favorite Song(s) From (almost) Every album I Own  | #65
More lists | Create a list! ››



Comments

‹‹ Back to the Albums
Comments: 7  
Users visited: 137  
Search this topic:  


AngelofDeth - 10.10.2014 at 07:04  
Rating: 7 Shot in the Dark is pure 80's gold.
ManiacBlasphemer - 11.04.2015 at 23:50  
Rating: 9
Written by AngelofDeth on 10.10.2014 at 07:04

Shot in the Dark is pure 80's gold.


Yeah, but I do consider Killer of Giants to be the best track here. A more commercial output, not as chaotic as the previous one, but a cohesive one. Though some people label this as a glam record for the heavy usage of synths, I consider it to be more like a gap between traditional heavy metal and glam metal (something like WASP in their early days).
AngelofDeth - 12.04.2015 at 06:18  
Rating: 7
Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 11.04.2015 at 23:50

Yeah, but I do consider Killer of Giants to be the best track here. A more commercial output, not as chaotic as the previous one, but a cohesive one. Though some people label this as a glam record for the heavy usage of synths, I consider it to be more like a gap between traditional heavy metal and glam metal (something like WASP in their early days).

Yeah that song is pretty good, along with Ultimate Sin and Never Know Why, otherwise the rest of the songs just arent that great imo.

Hmm, Synths don't equal glam, in fact most glam bands didn't/don't really use synth that much if at all.. Though I would agree that this album is a bit Glam-ish, with the easily sing-along choruses and simplicity. And though it has a couple hits it also features the bad side of glam with an excess of filler tracks featuring generic riffs and just plain awkward lyricism, I mean c'mon the song titles Secret Loser and Fool like You? lol

Also would have to disagree about the WASP thing, early WASP is fast and raw and rough, this album is mid-tempo and a lil more polished and restrained, plus Ozzy's and Blackie's voices couldn't be more different.
ManiacBlasphemer - 12.04.2015 at 11:18  
Rating: 9
Written by AngelofDeth on 12.04.2015 at 06:18

Also would have to disagree about the WASP thing, early WASP is fast and raw and rough, this album is mid-tempo and a lil more polished and restrained, plus Ozzy's and Blackie's voices couldn't be more different.


I didn't mean in terms of vocal delivery. The performance done here isn't like your average glam band, though the glam formula is present on some songs. It is a sort of intermediary between traditional heavy metal and glam. WASP was within this category, this is why they never really fit into one of these category. Reason why they did not experience the success of Judas Priest for example or glam bands like Motley Crue.
AngelofDeth - 12.04.2015 at 23:24  
Rating: 7
Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 12.04.2015 at 11:18

I didn't mean in terms of vocal delivery. The performance done here isn't like your average glam band, though the glam formula is present on some songs. It is a sort of intermediary between traditional heavy metal and glam. WASP was within this category, this is why they never really fit into one of these category. Reason why they did not experience the success of Judas Priest for example or glam bands like Motley Crue.

Okay I see what your saying now.

I guess I just never considered 'between heavy metal and glam' a distinct category of music, There's just too much room for variation imo, Ozzy(this album at least), WASP, Taking Dawn, Skid Row all sound so different that it doesn't really serve much purpose describing bands like this b/c people aren't going to be able to think up a general idea of how the music will sound like as opposed to most genre labels that instantly conjure up a general idea of sound i.e. death metal, thrash, black, glam, folk, symphonic etc etc.

If I'm going to describe either artist to a friend as something besides 'metal' or '80's metal', I'd consider WASP a unique and especially heavy, almost thrashy Sleaze band and Ozzy as a unique and often commercial heavy metal artist. I'd rather put both artists into categories unique their own as nothing sounds quite like either group and both often defy stereotypical categories/genre conventions, also imo these artists deserve to not be categorized 100%. Still, I can see what your saying now and it does make sense in a way, I'd just rather define each differently if I'm going to get more specific than heavy metal.
ManiacBlasphemer - 13.04.2015 at 01:21  
Rating: 9
Written by AngelofDeth on 12.04.2015 at 23:24

Okay I see what your saying now.

I guess I just never considered 'between heavy metal and glam' a distinct category of music, There's just too much room for variation imo, Ozzy(this album at least), WASP, Taking Dawn, Skid Row all sound so different that it doesn't really serve much purpose describing bands like this b/c people aren't going to be able to think up a general idea of how the music will sound like as opposed to most genre labels that instantly conjure up a general idea of sound i.e. death metal, thrash, black, glam, folk, symphonic etc etc.

If I'm going to describe either artist to a friend as something besides 'metal' or '80's metal', I'd consider WASP a unique and especially heavy, almost thrashy Sleaze band and Ozzy as a unique and often commercial heavy metal artist. I'd rather put both artists into categories unique their own as nothing sounds quite like either group and both often defy stereotypical categories/genre conventions, also imo these artists deserve to not be categorized 100%. Still, I can see what your saying now and it does make sense in a way, I'd just rather define each differently if I'm going to get more specific than heavy metal.


There are always bands who seem to bridge between two different genres while not entirely fitting in one of the. I gave WASP as an example because it was a band that definitely did not fit in either genres, it did not receive the hype the glam bands did, nor the recognition that heavy metal bands received. It attained a cult status, even breaching mainstream for a short while, but it did not last long. I could give more examples, such as Crematory in their early days being a bridge between death metal and gothic metal. They did not receive recognition from both genres simply because they were too mellow and melodic for a death metal band too loud and raw for a gothic metal band.

Ozzy Osbourne's solo career was indeed more commercial, firstly because of his already established reputation by being the original Sabbath vocalist and also because of some very talented instrumentalists he gathered around him. I would also add his tendency to be a little bit opportunistic, taking advantage of the metal revival in the early 80s with the whole NWOBHM and German heavy metal going strong, later venturing into commercial almost pop metal (this album especially) territories because of the hype the glam bands received and later even trying to somehow fit within a metal scene that was succombing to grunge with albums like No More Tears and later Ozzmosis.
Bad English - 26.07.2015 at 17:25  
Rating: 6
Written by AngelofDeth on 10.10.2014 at 07:04

Shot in the Dark is pure 80's gold.


yes and pop song as well , pop metal, pop rock name it

Advertise on Metal Storm


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Albums Ozzy Osbourne - No Rest For The Wicked 7 09.01.2012 by musicalkaratekid
Albums Ozzy Osbourne - Bark At The Moon 7 22.05.2010 by ExtraHachse
News Ozzy - Top Of The Silliness Charts 6 24.08.2006 by jadawal
News The Osbournes vs. Massive IRS Tax Lien 6 12.04.2011 by Neuroku
Reviews Ozzy Osbourne - Bark At The Moon 6 13.05.2008 by Jason W.



Hits total: 6229 | This month: 7