1. Ride the Lightning is their best album, most people will argue about that but actually, if you don't take AC/DC into account it's the best album in the world with all tracks being very good and 4 of them being exceptional (fade to black, trapped under ice, creeping death, call of cthulhu - in the order they appear on the album), this just doesn't happen this days (or very rarely in music at all).
2. Although many people praise the S&M album, it actually sucks. With the exception of a tale Of Wolf and Man, which is performed even better than the original (hence, it's worth to buy this album just for this song alone).
3. I know it was supposed to be just 2 facts, but another one would be that it's pointless to buy any Metallica album from Load on.
Thank you for reading this. I hope you agree (if you don't = you don't like Metallica).
And now something to make your time spent on reading this blog worthwile:
And remember, this is their best album. Hands down.
That's 3 things. IMO metallica, though good have gotten worse as time goes on as far as CDs. Their new one, Death Magnetic isn't good compared to their previous.
On August 08 2010 09:53 NuKedUFirst wrote: That's 3 things. IMO metallica, though good have gotten worse as time goes on as far as CDs. Their new one, Death Magnetic isn't good compared to their previous
If it's you that rated my post then I have just 2 things to say:
1. You didn't read the OP. 2. You rated it basing on what you didn't read.
You forgot a few things. They sold out intensely. Every album after And Justice For All... is awful on so many level.The band members themselves are dicks, and there are SO many better thrash bands out there, like Torture.
oh you know what, I forgot about Garage Inc. There are a lot of solid tracks on that. Maybe Metallica is really just the world's most successful cover band.
They should just record their take on Lightning to the Nations.
On August 08 2010 10:03 blabber wrote: I like Master of Puppets better
Well, you also have 4 great tracks there (Battery, The Thing That Should Not Be, Welcome Home, Orion), but overall, if they made me listen to the same album over and over again, I'd choose RTL over MOP.
MoP sucks ass because of all the goddamn filler. The Thing That Should Not Be, Sanitarium, Orion, Disposable Heroes, half of MoP itself, and Disposable Heroes (god that song is long). Terrible songs.
AJFA kinda followed in the footsteps, but at least Dyer's Even, Blackened, and Shortest Straw were good for some listens.
Also, I used to listen to metallica but now I realized Megadeth is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much better. Rust in Peace is greater than any album metallica has. Metallica does have a lot of angst and emo lyrics though, so I can see why it appeals more to people.
Also, I hate their drummer (ulrich). Can't switch tempo for shit and half the time he's offbeat.
Agreed with all of this, even though I'm not a huge Metallica fan. I don't know why people like Kill em' all, MoP, or black album so much, all of those are so bland.
On August 08 2010 11:26 SubtleArt wrote: These facts are so sujbjective.
Also, I used to listen to metallica but now I realized Megadeth is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much better. Rust in Peace is greater than any album metallica has. Metallica does have a lot of angst and emo lyrics though, so I can see why it appeals more to people.
Also, I hate their drummer (ulrich). Can't switch tempo for shit and half the time he's offbeat.
On August 08 2010 09:49 Manit0u wrote: I'll try to keep it brief:
1. Ride the Lightning is their best album, most people will argue about that but actually, if you don't take AC/DC into account it's the best album in the world with all tracks being very good and 4 of them being exceptional
Uhhhh, no.
Also, Mustaine wrote a butt-tonne of ride the lightning, the stuff he did write is easily the best metallica have ever played.
On August 08 2010 09:49 Manit0u wrote: I'll try to keep it brief:
1. Ride the Lightning is their best album, most people will argue about that but actually, if you don't take AC/DC into account it's the best album in the world with all tracks being very good and 4 of them being exceptional (fade to black, trapped under ice, creeping death, call of cthulhu - in the order they appear on the album), this just doesn't happen this days (or very rarely in music at all).
2. Although many people praise the S&M album, it actually sucks. With the exception of a tale Of Wolf and Man, which is performed even better than the original (hence, it's worth to buy this album just for this song alone).
3. I know it was supposed to be just 2 facts, but another one would be that it's pointless to buy any Metallica album from Load on.
Thank you for reading this. I hope you agree (if you don't = you don't like Metallica).
And now something to make your time spent on reading this blog worthwile:
Alright. I'm ok with that. I don't like Metallica very much regardless. I think AFJA is a 7/10 at best and even their "good" albums are incredibly mediocre.
i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Do you really believe that is inappropriate in any context?
You should take a look at some of progressive rock's epics. Rush's 2112, Yes' Close to the Edge, Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick, etc.
Plenty of songs have a lot to get across and 5 or less minutes just doesn't cut it. Especially for music as complex as progressive. Regardless of what I think of Metallica personally, they were a talented group that made fairly complex music for their genre and I don't think they dragged those songs out.
I couldn't imagine what a 4 minute Close to the Edge would sound like. What a limited way of seeing music.
These days, I feel like too many Metallica songs drag on and on. There's only so much palm muted fifths that I really want to listen to in between actual guitar riffs. And a big laugh at Lars' drumming.
On August 08 2010 12:01 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I think AC/DC are probably one of the worst bands of all time.
That's pretty interesting. Any particular reason why?
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Early on, Metallica was not typical pop music at all, DrH is right, they were trying to do something closer to Rush.
Also, a surprising amount of their songs are leftist politically with their lyrics. I tend to skip the anti-soldier ones such as "One".
I am a huge Metallica fan. I swear I have Ride the Lightning in my cd player atm :D. Their old shit is incredible, I own everything up to the black ALbum which was the beginning of the end. The black album is solid but nothing like their early ones and Load WTF I gave that cd away the night I bought it and never listened to anything new Metallica again. Currently I don't even have a clue how many cds since Load they've put out.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Do you really believe that is inappropriate in any context?
You should take a look at some of progressive rock's epics. Rush's 2112, Yes' Close to the Edge, Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick, etc.
Plenty of songs have a lot to get across and 5 or less minutes just doesn't cut it. Especially for music as complex as progressive. Regardless of what I think of Metallica personally, they were a talented group that made fairly complex music for their genre and I don't think they dragged those songs out.
I couldn't imagine what a 4 minute Close to the Edge would sound like. What a limited way of seeing music.
nope. just listened to the start of 2112. that first fucking minute could be scrapped. i know they had fun with some synthesizers... then when the actual music starts it takes another thirty seconds to get somewhere. the song shoulda started at 1:30. there is no point to have that first bullshit. most of the problems songs have that last longer than 6 minutes is that they are very repetitive and stop and start waaaay to often. 2112 seems like backstage rehearsal or something. what they shoulda did is just take the best parts and build off that. because as it stands there is just too much bullshit to listen to.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Do you really believe that is inappropriate in any context?
You should take a look at some of progressive rock's epics. Rush's 2112, Yes' Close to the Edge, Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick, etc.
Plenty of songs have a lot to get across and 5 or less minutes just doesn't cut it. Especially for music as complex as progressive. Regardless of what I think of Metallica personally, they were a talented group that made fairly complex music for their genre and I don't think they dragged those songs out.
I couldn't imagine what a 4 minute Close to the Edge would sound like. What a limited way of seeing music.
talented is far reaching from what they really are.
in my opinion, a concrete one in which i tried my best to like metallica, is that they are too banal, nothing new from any other heavy metal band. each song sounds like the last, doesn't go with anything. music**** give a kind of sentiment that makes you think of said song at a familiar time, metallica doesn't have this, in which chase they're nothing special. they shouldve died out so long ago.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Do you really believe that is inappropriate in any context?
You should take a look at some of progressive rock's epics. Rush's 2112, Yes' Close to the Edge, Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick, etc.
Plenty of songs have a lot to get across and 5 or less minutes just doesn't cut it. Especially for music as complex as progressive. Regardless of what I think of Metallica personally, they were a talented group that made fairly complex music for their genre and I don't think they dragged those songs out.
I couldn't imagine what a 4 minute Close to the Edge would sound like. What a limited way of seeing music.
nope. just listened to the start of 2112. that first fucking minute could be scrapped. i know they had fun with some synthesizers... then when the actual music starts it takes another thirty seconds to get somewhere. the song shoulda started at 1:30. there is no point to have that first bullshit. most of the problems songs have that last longer than 6 minutes is that they are very repetitive and stop and start waaaay to often. 2112 seems like backstage rehearsal or something. what they shoulda did is just take the best parts and build off that. because as it stands there is just too much bullshit to listen to.
: /
I can't get anywhere near seeing music the same way you do. Music doesn't have a point, it's point is to express whatever the artist intends it to express whether it's concise or not. You seem to be putting it in pretty objective terms though.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Early on, Metallica was not typical pop music at all, DrH is right, they were trying to do something closer to Rush.
Also, a surprising amount of their songs are leftist politically with their lyrics. I tend to skip the anti-soldier ones such as "One".
One isn't an anti-soldier song. One is about a movie in which a soldier is completely comatose without limbs and can only communicate through eye blinks. Disposable Heroes isn't an anti-solider song either although it is anti-war, the song seems to reference the vietnam war specifically.
Metallica isn't anywhere near the talent level of Rush. Rush's material from 1980 onward is "poppier" than anything Metallica has ever done, discounting albums made from 1975-1978.
On August 08 2010 12:23 mykyoyo wrote: These days, I feel like too many Metallica songs drag on and on. There's only so much palm muted fifths that I really want to listen to in between actual guitar riffs. And a big laugh at Lars' drumming.
I think AC/DC are probably one of the worst bands of all time.
That's pretty interesting. Any particular reason why?
Boring and generic. I can see why people liked them but they're the epitome of derivative blues rock. Shallow meaningless lyrics with a dime a dozen blues riffs played with zero intensity and what comes across as devoid of emotion or "heart" (whatever that means) doesn't make for a musical experience that I enjoy.
To each their own, I should have said something along the lines of "I really dislike AC/DC" since this is all subjective anyway.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
Metallica is an acquired taste... if you can't appreciate it, gtfo
And folks who think an 8 minute song is too long need to pop some Ritalin and s l o w d o w n. Get this kid some Justin Timberlake and CRY ME A FUCKIN RIVER.
Fade to Black may be one of best metal songs ever...
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
usually i have to be double dog dared but i did it anyways due to seeing how long the song actually is. ok. heres the deal. that shit is generic. synths are really cool if you are just starting to get into sound design. however for people like me who know how even a bit about it know that its lame. its just a fact. sure go ahead and say its expressing your soul or w/e the hell you want to believe. like i said previously. take the best parts from that song and rework it into 3-5 minutes and then it will be much better. problem solved. ///
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
usually i have to be double dog dared but i did it anyways due to seeing how long the song actually is. ok. heres the deal. that shit is generic. synths are really cool if you are just starting to get into sound design. however for people like me who know how even a bit about it know that its lame. its just a fact. sure go ahead and say its expressing your soul or w/e the hell you want to believe. like i said previously. take the best parts from that song and rework it into 3-5 minutes and then it will be much better. problem solved. ///
Movie/2 hours Books/200 pages Drama/20 episodes
Replace.
Pretty retarded lol.
Sometimes people really have a lot to tell. You could shorten 3 minute songs into 2 minutes if theres fillers. There are 5+ minute songs without fillers.
On August 08 2010 15:24 mmp wrote: Metallica is an acquired taste... if you can't appreciate it, gtfo
And folks who think an 8 minute song is too long need to pop some Ritalin and s l o w d o w n. Get this kid some Justin Timberlake and CRY ME A FUCKIN RIVER.
Fade to Black may be one of best metal songs ever...
Really? I think AC/DC are probably one of the worst bands of all time.
Thou art banished from this thread, blasphemer!
And to all people who think 6+ minute songs suck... WTF are you talking about? Have you ever heard about this band called PINK FUCKING FLOYD? No? Let me refresh your memory then:
Shit does not get any more epic than this...
And of course, if you think this is old and stuff like that, then let me present to you something more recent:
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
usually i have to be double dog dared but i did it anyways due to seeing how long the song actually is. ok. heres the deal. that shit is generic. synths are really cool if you are just starting to get into sound design. however for people like me who know how even a bit about it know that its lame. its just a fact. sure go ahead and say its expressing your soul or w/e the hell you want to believe. like i said previously. take the best parts from that song and rework it into 3-5 minutes and then it will be much better. problem solved. ///
How about classical? Should Chopin have shortened his nocturnes?
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
usually i have to be double dog dared but i did it anyways due to seeing how long the song actually is. ok. heres the deal. that shit is generic. synths are really cool if you are just starting to get into sound design. however for people like me who know how even a bit about it know that its lame. its just a fact. sure go ahead and say its expressing your soul or w/e the hell you want to believe. like i said previously. take the best parts from that song and rework it into 3-5 minutes and then it will be much better. problem solved. ///
How about classical? Should Chopin have shortened his nocturnes?
Probably. Every classical piece I've ever heard was chock full of filler. There's like a minute that everyone knows from each classical piece because that minute is much better than the rest of the piece.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
usually i have to be double dog dared but i did it anyways due to seeing how long the song actually is. ok. heres the deal. that shit is generic. synths are really cool if you are just starting to get into sound design. however for people like me who know how even a bit about it know that its lame. its just a fact. sure go ahead and say its expressing your soul or w/e the hell you want to believe. like i said previously. take the best parts from that song and rework it into 3-5 minutes and then it will be much better. problem solved. ///
How about classical? Should Chopin have shortened his nocturnes?
Probably. Every classical piece I've ever heard was chock full of filler. There's like a minute that everyone knows from each classical piece because that minute is much better than the rest of the piece.
hahahaha oh my, I don't even want to know what shitty music you like to listen to, its probably all garbage.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
usually i have to be double dog dared but i did it anyways due to seeing how long the song actually is. ok. heres the deal. that shit is generic. synths are really cool if you are just starting to get into sound design. however for people like me who know how even a bit about it know that its lame. its just a fact. sure go ahead and say its expressing your soul or w/e the hell you want to believe. like i said previously. take the best parts from that song and rework it into 3-5 minutes and then it will be much better. problem solved. ///
How about classical? Should Chopin have shortened his nocturnes?
Probably. Every classical piece I've ever heard was chock full of filler. There's like a minute that everyone knows from each classical piece because that minute is much better than the rest of the piece.
The OP is so full of shit. Ride the lightning is good yes, don't know if it's there best. I always liked AJFA more, but saying they havent made anything good after load is just bullshit. Death magnetic is actually a pretty good album, and I think basically all the tracks are good. However it still doesnt compare to the there first 4 studio albums, but it's still pretty good, unlike that shitty st. anger album (barf).
I didn´t want to know and after reading I still don´t care, I guess I can´t have my 2minutes back I feel cheated.
E. well okay okay
1. The first album was promising ( probably only because of Mustaine ) 2. The next ones had some good moments IMO, then swedes killed Burton and musically Metallica was over 3. MONEY GOOD NAPSTER BAAAADDD! 4. ??? 5. Profit
Sumthin like that?
I also never understood the dissing of St. Anger although I haven´t heard it that many times. I mean it had something fresh for the first time since 82.... Maybe it´s just because of the sounds that have sucked on Metallica records since 86, and the fact Lars still can´t play :/
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
ever heard of progressive metal/rock?
I dare you to listen to Dream Theater's "Octavarium", Redemption's "Black and White World", or Devin Townsend's "The Death of Music" and make this argument again. Your view on music is clearly uninformed.
usually i have to be double dog dared but i did it anyways due to seeing how long the song actually is. ok. heres the deal. that shit is generic. synths are really cool if you are just starting to get into sound design. however for people like me who know how even a bit about it know that its lame. its just a fact. sure go ahead and say its expressing your soul or w/e the hell you want to believe. like i said previously. take the best parts from that song and rework it into 3-5 minutes and then it will be much better. problem solved. ///
How about classical? Should Chopin have shortened his nocturnes?
Probably. Every classical piece I've ever heard was chock full of filler. There's like a minute that everyone knows from each classical piece because that minute is much better than the rest of the piece.
Here ya go, something short for you
No content for one second = shit. If I told you your short story dragged on and contained lots of redundant description, that is not a reason to replace the entire story with the word, "dick". A song or a story should be as long as it needs, and no longer.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Well, never listen to Between the Buried and Me then. You'll just be angry.
I knew as soon as I read the OP that this was just going to be people mindlessly pressing their opinions on one another about music. Which is usually the case with re-hashed topics like this. Regardless, I really like S&M and I also really enjoy Death Magnetic.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Well, never listen to Between the Buried and Me then. You'll just be angry.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Well, never listen to Between the Buried and Me then. You'll just be angry.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Do you really believe that is inappropriate in any context?
You should take a look at some of progressive rock's epics. Rush's 2112, Yes' Close to the Edge, Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick, etc.
Plenty of songs have a lot to get across and 5 or less minutes just doesn't cut it. Especially for music as complex as progressive. Regardless of what I think of Metallica personally, they were a talented group that made fairly complex music for their genre and I don't think they dragged those songs out.
I couldn't imagine what a 4 minute Close to the Edge would sound like. What a limited way of seeing music.
On August 09 2010 03:40 PanN wrote: I can't believe someone in this thread said "Orion" sucks, its one of their best songs... ugh headache
Orion does suck
boring instrumentals do not belong at all. Call of the Ktulu was nice, but Orion didn't work out. Probably one of their worst tracks on a good album after that dumb bass solo thing on Kill 'Em All.
On August 08 2010 12:11 OneFierceZealot wrote: i heard this one song this one time and it was ok. i changed stations and listened to two songs in a row. i came back to first station and the one song was still playing. it was by metallica. im assuming half of their songs could be a good minute to two minutes shorter. there is no reason for a band to have 6+ minute long songs.
Do you really believe that is inappropriate in any context?
You should take a look at some of progressive rock's epics. Rush's 2112, Yes' Close to the Edge, Jethro Tull's Thick as a Brick, etc.
Plenty of songs have a lot to get across and 5 or less minutes just doesn't cut it. Especially for music as complex as progressive. Regardless of what I think of Metallica personally, they were a talented group that made fairly complex music for their genre and I don't think they dragged those songs out.
I couldn't imagine what a 4 minute Close to the Edge would sound like. What a limited way of seeing music.
I'd also like to add Rime of the Ancient Mariner by Iron Maiden to the list. It's excellent and wouldn't be near as good without the long build-ups and tempo changes.
EPT
