Lol?

I hate it when bands detune their old material when they play it live, (Kudos to Slayer for always playing their classics live in their original tuning!) so the idea of a band re-recording a whole album like that doesnt really thrill me! lol

There are two good things about ''Let There Be Blood''. One, Tom Hunting's drumming. The guy has always been awesome, and he shows he may be a lot older than he was back in the day, but he's better now than he ever was! And Rob Dukes gives a decent performance here. He actually tries to imitate Paul Baloff at times, which is a good thing, and his vocals are less hardcorish than on his 2 studio albums with Exodus. I still rate Paul and especially Zetro as better Exodus vocalists, but Rob does very well here, I have to say!

Musically, only ''Metal Command'' actually benefits from the detuning, sounding better and more powerful than it did on the original album. And ''Strike Of The Beast'' loses nothing in the update, and is still as vicious and destructive as it ever was! Most of the songs have lost something though, and sound like sterile, watered down versions of their original counterparts. This album highlights exactly why as a general rule, I hate band's detuning their old stuff. The sound quality is obviously a lot better, but even that has it's down side. Im sure newer Exodus fans may actually prefer this version, but for me, the original was perfect as it was. If its not broke, dont try and fix it!

The song, Exodus, sounds better on this album. It just randomly came up on my Pandora station, so I'll probably change my mind and download this album when I get home.

Written by Dangerboner on 13.04.2010 at 11:07

The song, Exodus, sounds better on this album. It just randomly came up on my Pandora station, so I'll probably change my mind and download this album when I get home.

Ah, its horses for courses I guess! For me, that was one of the songs that really suffered from being downtuned. But if you liked it, you should definitely give the album a go! The band certainly turn in good performances. ''Metal Command'' was always the weakest song on the original for me, but I really like the remake of it. I much prefer the new version of that song! xD

Written by Angelic Storm on 13.04.2010 at 16:15


Ah, its horses for courses I guess! For me, that was one of the songs that really suffered from being downtuned. But if you liked it, you should definitely give the album a go! The band certainly turn in good performances. ''Metal Command'' was always the weakest song on the original for me, but I really like the remake of it. I much prefer the new version of that song! xD

Haven't listened to it since it came out. So, I'd better put it on in a short while then.
Best thing about this release is that finally Hell's Breath has been released in a studio version all I am waiting for now is to be released in a studio version are Deathrw and the ORIGINAL version of Impaler. Btw all those threee songs are performed live at the Double Live Dynamo! DVD which features the only two complete concerts ever captured on film with Baloff on vocals. The one with the three old songs is the October 27th 1985 Dynamo Club Eindhoven, Holland one in front of abotu 300 people (and I was present happy happy joy joy at the age of 17) and the other is the May 17th 1997 Dynamo Open Air Festival Eindhoven, Holland in front of about 88,000 people (also present there but the tiny gig made an everlasting impression)

Yep Hell's Breath is a great song, and another early Exodus song that was written by Kirk Hammett. So many people slag him off, yet his influence on thrash in its earliest stages is undeniable! I think a lot of those early songs where specifically left off early Exodus albums because they were written by Kirk. Its certainly not because they weren't good songs, because they definitely are. Hmm...did they do a proper studio version of "Impaler" with Paul Baloff on vocals? I know the version of ''Impaler'' with Zetro on vocals was meant to just be a bonus track. But ended up on the album proper cos Century Media forced Exodus to remove a song called ''Crime Of The Century'' from the album. (Now, I wonder if that song will ever see the light of day??)

You saw Exodus in 1985?! Woah, that must have been amazing, you're very lucky! xD I was still in primary school in 1985, and not into metal yet. haha

What happened to this album, it totally disappeared from the band's profile...

Written by Angelic Storm on 14.04.2010 at 00:08

Yep Hell's Breath is a great song, and another early Exodus song that was written by Kirk Hammett. So many people slag him off, yet his influence on thrash in its earliest stages is undeniable! I think a lot of those early songs where specifically left off early Exodus albums because they were written by Kirk. Its certainly not because they weren't good songs, because they definitely are.

You give Kirk too much credit. He only co-wrote those songs and then primarily a couple of riffs. And imo, yes, Kirk is an immensely overrated guitar player. Can't keep his foot off his wah-wah. Read what Reb Beach (I think that's what his name is) has to say on Kirk's guitar abilities The link cane be found in a Metallica thread I think.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 14.04.2010 at 10:23
You give Kirk too much credit. He only co-wrote those songs and then primarily a couple of riffs. And imo, yes, Kirk is an immensely overrated guitar player. Can't keep his foot off his wah-wah. Read what Reb Beach (I think that's what his name is) has to say on Kirk's guitar abilities The link cane be found in a Metallica thread I think.

I dont think I am. I know he only co-wrote those songs, but who knows how much, or how little input he had in them? After all, who's to say he took all the riffs he wrote for Exodus with him to Metallica? Take ''Hell's Breath'', there's not a single riff in there which ended up on a Metallica song, so who's to say how much or how little of that music is his? Besides, I know how ridiculous certain people can be when it comes to slagging off Kirk to remain ''tr00/kvlt''. I've seen people saying "Impaler" is a crap song, ONLY because Kirk had a hand in writing it! To me, that is just being ridiculous. How any lover of Exodus and old school thrash can say ''Impaler'' is a crap Exodus song, is beyond me! Kirk is overrated, sure. But there are a lot who refuse to give Metallica or him any credit for the initiation of thrash metal. If you believe that Exodus were one of the originators, then you must also give Kirk credit, as he helped write a lot of stuff with them before he left. But some people refuse to acknowledge that, just because he is in Metallica.

I read what Reb Beach said, but come on, he had to ask what band Kirk was in! Does anyone really believe he didnt actually know that? Its the ''cool'' thing these days to slag off Metallica, and Kirk, and I think he's merely jumping onto that bandwagon. He also mentioned an incident were Metallica were throwing darts at a picture of Winger, I guess he must still harbour bad feelings because of that. Anyways, for anyone to call Kirk ''a bad guitarist'' is in serious need of a hearing aid! Yep, I can see why some wouldnt like his style, but that doesnt make him a bad player. I play guitar, and believe me, a lot of Kirk's stuff is very hard to play! People go on about him using the wah so much, but other players like Michael Ammot also use the wah heavily in their solos, yet they aren't criticised in the same way that Kirk is. I think some people are overly critical of him purely because of who he is, and because he's in such a big band like Metallica. Its impossible for some people to look at Kirk, or Metallica objectively. Overrated by some people? Yep, he probably is. But a bad guitar player? Nope, no way. A crap guitar player could not play his solos, so that's just nonsense!

I guess I should post that in that thread...:P

So I downloaded the album and listened to it today. Definitely not as good as the original, but if somehow BBB never existed and Let There Be Blood was an original album, it would still be one of their best.

I've read tons of sites online, and all I see is people bitching about it and it pisses me off. A re-recording does not negate the original. The original still exists. If you do not like the re-recording, then don't fucking buy it. People rate this album poorly because they compare it to the original, and that's fucking retarded.

They should also re-record Pleasures of the Flesh, and even rewrite the drum parts, because they fucking suck.

Written by Dangerboner on 14.04.2010 at 11:38

So I downloaded the album and listened to it today. Definitely not as good as the original, but if somehow BBB never existed and Let There Be Blood was an original album, it would still be one of their best.

I've read tons of sites online, and all I see is people bitching about it and it pisses me off. A re-recording does not negate the original. The original still exists. If you do not like the re-recording, then don't fucking buy it. People rate this album poorly because they compare it to the original, and that's fucking retarded.

They should also re-record Pleasures of the Flesh, and even rewrite the drum parts, because they fucking suck.

Well, I think if you re-record one of your old albums, you're going to have to expect people to compare it to the original. I think what is retarded, is people slating it purely for what it is. I know some people who hate it, and havent even heard it! I mean, what?! And of course, most of the complaints Ive seen about it, are about Rob Dukes. Again, I think its this stupid kvlt/tr00 image that some people feel they have to live up to. The main thing I dont like about LTBB is the fact the songs are detuned. But that's just a personal preference, I guess. The performances on it are really great, including by Rob Dukes.

Woah, I dunno about re-recording ''Pleasures Of The Flesh''! Then again, that is my fave Exodus album, and I think its perfect as it is!

---Top 10 ''Exodus''---
1-.A Lesson In Violence
2-.Hammer And Life
3-.Bonded By Blood
4-.The Toxic Waltz
5-.Piranha
6-.Deathamphetamine
7-.Brain Dead
8-.Fabulous Disaster
9-.Corruption
10-.Deliver Us to Evil

Why in the hell would they possibly rerecord what's often considered a flawless masterpiece? Rerecord demos or unused songs or something, god.

I'm surprised at the praise this album got on this website. Everywhere else I was at, this album was getting panned by everyone.

To be honest ... I like this Album more then the originally one.

I never was in Pauls Voice ... for me it always sounded to pseudo-hysteric and I couldn't listen to more than two sonds in a row. Funny thing is I liked the music on Bonded by Blood but never bought it b/c of the voice. I know, most of you guys like to kill me now ... but I can handle this

I grew up with thrash back in the day and I'm now able to buy this classic b/c Robs voice fits perfect for me.

It's a good decision to re-record it b/c the new sound wipes of the dust and let newbies listen to this masterpiece w/o the oldish sound that annoys you ... I think we all should be thankfull ... new engineering and sound is good to our old stuff \m/ AND I like this aproach even more than just remastering it ... this means sellout for me ... but if you take your time and effort to re-create a masterpiece to fit todays world and still stay true to the original ... that's cool ... HELL YEAH!!!!

Think about Kill 'em All being re-recorded with the possibilites of today ... I'm sure we would love it ... and most of the old bands also would love b/c now it could sound like it was supposed to be

Written by Mage257 on 21.07.2013 at 16:23

To be honest ... I like this Album more then the originally one.

I never was in Pauls Voice ... for me it always sounded to pseudo-hysteric and I couldn't listen to more than two sonds in a row. Funny thing is I liked the music on Bonded by Blood but never bought it b/c of the voice. I know, most of you guys like to kill me now ... but I can handle this

I grew up with thrash back in the day and I'm now able to buy this classic b/c Robs voice fits perfect for me.

It's a good decision to re-record it b/c the new sound wipes of the dust and let newbies listen to this masterpiece w/o the oldish sound that annoys you ... I think we all should be thankfull ... new engineering and sound is good to our old stuff \m/ AND I like this aproach even more than just remastering it ... this means sellout for me ... but if you take your time and effort to re-create a masterpiece to fit todays world and still stay true to the original ... that's cool ... HELL YEAH!!!!

Think about Kill 'em All being re-recorded with the possibilites of today ... I'm sure we would love it ... and most of the old bands also would love b/c now it could sound like it was supposed to be

Heresy!!!!!!

...I'm just kidding with you. I prefer this to what I've heard of the original as well. I think I just never liked Paul Baloff as a vocalist: he wasn't bad, but he seemed more like an attitude than a vocalist, if you get what I mean.

As to re-recording Kill 'Em All...I don't think that's such a good idea. Putting aside my thoughts on Lars as a drummer (he's not as bad as his detractors make him out to be, but I really don't believe he'd be able to pull off the whole album again), there's so much animosity among Metallica fans as it is that I reckon the fanbase would tear itself to tiny pieces just deciding whether it was even an interesting idea. The animosity among Exodus fans when this was released was pretty bad across the rest of the internet (for some odd reason, this place was pretty much the only place that gave it anything above half the marks available), what chance would Kill 'Em All re-recorded have?

Maybe I'm being sceptical, but I don't see a re-recording of Kill 'Em All getting even a vaguely friendly reception. Most people don't like re-recordings even at the best of times (I won't deny it seems to be a waste of valuable studio time which a new album could be used for, hint hint)...

Written by Nemo Atkins on 08.08.2013 at 23:10

there's so much animosity among Metallica fans as it is that I reckon the fanbase would tear itself to tiny pieces just deciding whether it was even an interesting idea. The animosity among Exodus fans when this was released was pretty bad across the rest of the internet (for some odd reason, this place was pretty much the only place that gave it anything above half the marks available), what chance would Kill 'Em All re-recorded have?

Maybe I'm being sceptical, but I don't see a re-recording of Kill 'Em All getting even a vaguely friendly reception. Most people don't like re-recordings even at the best of times (I won't deny it seems to be a waste of valuable studio time which a new album could be used for, hint hint)...

I believe "fans" should be more open minded 'bout what a band is doing. They're human beings and develop through their course of life .

Maybe you're right when it comes down to re-recording Kill 'em All. If you take a look at Metallicas recording process these days, the feel would disappear. Just using digital recording and piecing the best parts together or even "retrofitting" it in the rigth place would mess things up.

For Exodus ... they already had their follow up Exhibit B: The Human Condition recorded and just did Let There Be Blood for fun and as a dedication to Paul and the fans.

Written by Mage257 on 09.08.2013 at 09:17

Written by Nemo Atkins on 08.08.2013 at 23:10

there's so much animosity among Metallica fans as it is that I reckon the fanbase would tear itself to tiny pieces just deciding whether it was even an interesting idea. The animosity among Exodus fans when this was released was pretty bad across the rest of the internet (for some odd reason, this place was pretty much the only place that gave it anything above half the marks available), what chance would Kill 'Em All re-recorded have?

Maybe I'm being sceptical, but I don't see a re-recording of Kill 'Em All getting even a vaguely friendly reception. Most people don't like re-recordings even at the best of times (I won't deny it seems to be a waste of valuable studio time which a new album could be used for, hint hint)...

I believe "fans" should be more open minded 'bout what a band is doing. They're human beings and develop through their course of life .

Maybe you're right when it comes down to re-recording Kill 'em All. If you take a look at Metallicas recording process these days, the feel would disappear. Just using digital recording and piecing the best parts together or even "retrofitting" it in the rigth place would mess things up.

For Exodus ... they already had their follow up Exhibit B: The Human Condition recorded and just did Let There Be Blood for fun and as a dedication to Paul and the fans.

I'm not the guy you have to win over about being open minded! As much as I feel there was a quality decrease with everything post-The Black Album on Metallica's front, I do respect that there wasn't really a lot of thrash metal coming out at the time (honestly, I blame most of the middle tier bands giving up for the death of thrash over the big bands changing their style: you can't really have a scene when there is next to nothing coming out of it, underground or mainstream) and that most bands were caught in a catch-22 situation: either continue making thrash metal and risk never getting a record deal again (many bands were actually dropped because they refused to change their style) or change with the times and incur the wrath of old school fans. Metallica went for the latter and...well, we know how that turned out. That said, I appreciate people change over time: I met up with some high school friends a week ago and most of them were surprised I like metal now, since I used to be a pretty big folk and pop punk guy in high school (although, truth be told, I was listening to metal then, just never told anyone).

Your point on re-recording Kill 'Em All wasn't what I was thinking, but that's actually a great point. I don't have a problem with digital recording myself, but I can't deny that it doesn't feel quite as exciting as a record done on tape. On the other hand, sometimes it does actually work to have the sound feel cold, so put it down to a case by case thing. With thrash, I'd say that I have to agree with the old school fans: digital recording makes the record feel more controlled, which is the last thing you want with a style known for being energetic!

Regarding the Exodus point...I don't think Exhibit B was recorded until late 2009, but I'm going off wikipedia there, so I may be horribly wrong. That said, I don't entirely understand why so many people are like "Paul Baloff is rolling in his grave!!!!!!!" with this album when you consider Paul himself reportedly wanted to do it before he died (I believe it's said in the liner notes of the album, but, again, I might be wrong) and, at the end of the day, it doesn't make the original record suddenly become pointless and make LTBB be the new, improved, definitive version of it: it's just a different version of it.

Written by Mage257 on 09.08.2013 at 09:17

and just did Let There Be Blood for fun and as a dedication to Paul and the fans.

they actually did Let There Be Blood because now they would be getting royalties from it whereas they didn't get any royalties from bonded By Blood at all. They had apparently signed away the royalties to that album.

I had completely forgotten this album even exists. Let There Be Blood feels so pointless, they just had to waste so much time and money to make this rehash when they could've written something new instead. It's not worthless, but this thing never had a chance to begin with since the original is such a beloved classic that remaking it is just stupid.

^ unnecessary release, true, but still enjoyable for me.