Recently, there have been interviews from individuals involved (or, once involved) in the Big 4, such as Charlie Benante and David Ellefson, discussing potential future plans/shows.

I was wondering what people's thoughts were on a potential replacement for the 4th spot if Araya declines and Slayer were not to appear.

Would you want Kerry King's yet to be revealed project to take their spot? Have another band like Exodus or Testament, who are often labelled as would be members of a big 5, take their spot? Do you think the tour should be called something else?

My (very subjective) opinion is that there is no Big 4 without Slayer, simply because Slayer is the greatest and most unique-sounding of the Four. At some point in their career, the other 3 became a joke; Slayer never did - they had a few mediocre albums, but never albums that deserved to be thrown in the bin.

If they replace Slayer, they should call it something else.

Written by nikarg on 05.02.2023 at 13:44

My (very subjective) opinion is that there is no Big 4 without Slayer, simply because Slayer is the greatest and most unique-sounding of the Four. At some point in their career, the other 3 became a joke; Slayer never did - they had a few mediocre albums, but never albums that deserved to be thrown in the bin.

If they replace Slayer, they should call it something else.

*cough*Diabolus In Musica*cough*Undisputed Attitude*cough*

You'll have to excuse me, flu season

Do you think they should revive the concept as "Clash Of The Titans" instead? Keeps the concept and links it back to the past. If yes, KK or another one of the band's?

Written by nikarg on 05.02.2023 at 13:44

My (very subjective) opinion is that there is no Big 4 without Slayer, simply because Slayer is the greatest and most unique-sounding of the Four. At some point in their career, the other 3 became a joke; Slayer never did - they had a few mediocre albums, but never albums that deserved to be thrown in the bin.

If they replace Slayer, they should call it something else.

MetallicA did became joke even black album and cover album is great, Megadeth became boring after Youtonasia, whit few good songs in each album after. Anthrax can't stand the band after Persistence Of Time. But then Slayer to me after Season in the Abyss are boring to. Big 4 now is live thing tfor someone even bands get some money.

Written by omne metallum on 06.02.2023 at 21:08

Do you think they should revive the concept as "Clash Of The Titans" instead? Keeps the concept and links it back to the past. If yes, KK or another one of the band's?

I think 'Clash of the Titans' would be acceptable. I'd prefer Exodus as the 4th band because we have heard nothing of KK's new band to call it a "titan" already.

I'm biased because Slayer for me have always been one of the ultimate metal gods, so I wouldn't even consider them a top 4 personally, for me the top 4 IMO will be:

1. Megadeth
2. Metallica
3. Testament
4. Exodus

Slayer for me are in a class above, a class of their own in terms of U.S. thrash metal. If I was to have a top 4 which would go across the whole metal catalogue I would actually include Slayer, the others being Iron Maiden, Death and Black Sabbath. That's how much I appreciate what they've done to the metal world.

Big 4 was just a promotion campaign by the media to promote the most popular bands of thrash, late 80s, early 90s if I remember right (I remember reading about the big 4 of thrash in some magazine back then), so there is no personal big 4 or the big 4 is wrong and so on.

Obviously, if they want to make another big 4 tour/concert, the 4 bands should be there, otherwise it can't be called "Big 4".

Written by JoHn Doe on 07.02.2023 at 11:31

Big 4 was just a promotion campaign by the media to promote the most popular bands of thrash, late 80s, early 90s if I remember right (I remember reading about the big 4 of thrash in some magazine back then), so there is no personal big 4 or the big 4 is wrong and so on.

Obviously, if they want to make another big 4 tour/concert, the 4 bands should be there, otherwise it can't be called "Big 4".

Its a great short statement about it, each tm band in 80s n 90s put out good albums out.

My mistake, I confused the original big 4 to my personal top 4 which is another debate entirely

As JoHnDoE pointed out the big four was in other words, the most popular four at the time, which obviously included Slayer, but they were still the best of the four imho

Written by JoHn Doe on 07.02.2023 at 11:31

Big 4 was just a promotion campaign by the media to promote the most popular bands of thrash, late 80s, early 90s if I remember right (I remember reading about the big 4 of thrash in some magazine back then), so there is no personal big 4 or the big 4 is wrong and so on.

Obviously, if they want to make another big 4 tour/concert, the 4 bands should be there, otherwise it can't be called "Big 4".

Would KK's new project doing a Slayer set suffice? Sure, it may be Slayer as we know it, but if its just a marketing gimmick as you say, then there shouldn't be a big problem tweaking it like that.

Written by omne metallum on 08.02.2023 at 22:49

Written by JoHn Doe on 07.02.2023 at 11:31

Big 4 was just a promotion campaign by the media to promote the most popular bands of thrash, late 80s, early 90s if I remember right (I remember reading about the big 4 of thrash in some magazine back then), so there is no personal big 4 or the big 4 is wrong and so on.

Obviously, if they want to make another big 4 tour/concert, the 4 bands should be there, otherwise it can't be called "Big 4".

Would KK's new project doing a Slayer set suffice? Sure, it may be Slayer as we know it, but if its just a marketing gimmick as you say, then there shouldn't be a big problem tweaking it like that.

"Promotion campaign" has a positive connotation. "Marketing gimmick" has a negative one.
Slayer has retired. Therefore a Big 4 show cannot be organized.

I'm not sure how they calculated the original big 4, if it was record sales, crowd sizes, net worth, but I do wonder if you were to apply that same logic to the same group of bands on today's output what you'd come up with (not including Slayer anymore). Metallica would be streets ahead then I'm not sure, Megadeth 2nd I'd say (even though they don't pull big crowds when I've seen them in 3 countries outside of the US). But 3rd and 4th? I may be underestimating current day Anthrax

The big 4 was just the four biggest selling thrash bands, and those four were streets ahead of everyone else numbers wise. So with no Slayer their spot should go to fifth highest selling which I'm guessing is probably Testament

Written by Ball Fondlers on 09.02.2023 at 03:05

I'm not sure how they calculated the original big 4, if it was record sales, crowd sizes, net worth...

"Big" as in popular, famous, that's all, probably record sales and crowds at concerts as well. These 4 bands were the biggest, most popular in thrash.

I would propose a total upset: make Anthrax the headliner, have Dave Lombardo sit in with Suicidal Tendencies again to open, and then sell bootleg Megadeth t-shirts at the entrance. Tell Metallica the wrong date for the show.

A more serious answer would be that the Big 4 designation, as others have pointed out, arose purely on the basis of popularity, which I would assume is a metric itself collated from record and ticket sales. If you wanted to promote somebody, it would only be fair to use the same criteria, so it would be whichever of Exodus or Testament has sold more albums. Overkill and Flotsam And Jetsam are also worthy of consideration, but without doing any research whatsoever it's my instinct that they don't sell quite as well as the former two.

That said, I'm with Nik on this one: Slayer is the only one of the four bands that never released garbage. Diabolus In Musica isn't exactly a good album, but there are some good songs on it and it's still a cut above even the mediocre material of the other three, to say nothing of their worst material. Metallica and Megadeth each became a joke at some point in their careers, and Anthrax started out as a joke (which is why they're good). Without Slayer to balance everyone out, I don't see a point in having a Big 4.

Personally, I have no expectations for Kerry King's big project, and even if it turns out to be listenable, there's no way it would be an adequate replacement for Slayer, so I think the ideal solution would be to choose an entirely different name for the whole tour/operation/whatever. Combinations of three have toured together before without drawing an association to the "Big 4" shtick, so that should be fine. That said, if there were an event with Metallica, Megadeth, and Anthrax and then Kerry King showed up lugging his new material, I doubt there would be a single media publication or advertisement that would be able to restrain itself from pointing out the connection and labeling it as a Big Four Tour anyway.

Everyone has their own opinion on Big 4 but for me there is no Big 4 without Slayer with all due respect to other bands.. I would also replace Megadeth with Testament wich are better IMO..

Written by Ivan Drago on 09.02.2023 at 07:58

The big 4 was just the four biggest selling thrash bands, and those four were streets ahead of everyone else numbers wise. So with no Slayer their spot should go to fifth highest selling which I'm guessing is probably Testament

Yes, the only thing that made them big was the large portion of revenue that did not see its way back to the artists.
I believe my opinion is worth as much as I'm willing to fork over to they that have already sold themselves soulless over the years, with or without Slayer. Not even the King of Thrash, Dave Mustaine, can heal the taint left by those sub-kind of monsters.

No Slayer and I truly wouldn't give a shit. I've seen Anthrax craploads over the last couple of years, the last time I saw Megadeth they were utter shite and that other band - I can't remember what they're called right now but aren't they a Prada-sporting pop rock outfit these days? Just swap them with Blink 182.

Big 4 in the context of a tour is really just a marketing brand. I think plenty of tickets would sell with a more appropriate name that covers the remaining three. It would be silly to use that brand with no Slayer. Maybe you could call it the Three Out of Four Ain’t Bad Tour.

I wasn’t tracking the new King project, but I have to say I can’t imagine it would really be all that compelling if they didn’t play Slayer songs on a Big 4 tour. I’d love to be surprised, and not taking away from KK’s status as a legend, but Hanneman wrote or co-wrote all the best Slayer material.

You want a big something without Slayer? Put whoever you like in that ensemble, but please name it differently.

The Big Four were Metallica, Megadeth, Slayer, Anthrax. The moniker indicated four thrash bands with the highest record sales. And that's it. If you want other criteria, like your own musical taste, fine, but just use another name.

Written by Daniell on 24.02.2023 at 15:17

You want a big something without Slayer? Put whoever you like in that ensemble, but please name it differently.

Something like: "The not quite as big as it used to be, 4"? But maybe that's not catchy enough, though...

Seriously though, I agree. If they want to do something like a tour with 4 bands or something like that, just call it something else. What's the point in calling it the big 4 when it doesn't have all the original bands in it. Fans will immediately see right through that marketing trick anyway.

Blah blah blah ssdd, the big four represents a specific group of bands during a specific era and like a meal at some fancy-pants restaurants, not open to substitutions or alterations. Your personal fee-fees don't matter an iota.

Call the tour something else entirely. Just come up with something original. I know, based upon watching endless reboots, recycles and spin-offs the creative industry seems to have serious issues with this, so maybe that new fangled AI technology that's making art, doing chat and even apparently creating entire animated Seinfeld routines might be able to string a couple words together.

Written by BitterCOld on 09.03.2023 at 14:28

Blah blah blah ssdd, the big four represents a specific group of bands during a specific era and like a meal at some fancy-pants restaurants, not open to substitutions or alterations. Your personal fee-fees don't matter an iota.

Call the tour something else entirely. Just come up with something original. I know, based upon watching endless reboots, recycles and spin-offs the creative industry seems to have serious issues with this, so maybe that new fangled AI technology that's making art, doing chat and even apparently creating entire animated Seinfeld routines might be able to string a couple words together.

Completely agree with this. Why call it something that it is not? Why setting expectations that you can't meet? To be the big 4 you need the big 4.

Just screw that, call it "The Other 4" and get Exodus, Death Angel, Testament and Overkill. Rofl.

Even if the "big whatever" concept was based on bands who were selling millions of records by 1989 or so, I've always thought Exodus, Testament or Overkill could have been part of it. Sure those bands never sold that many records nor had the same exposure as the "big four", but they did get some exposure/publicity outside of MTV's Headbangers Ball back then (specifically including coverage on numerous magazines from Guitar World to RIP Magazine to Kerrang!).