Talk:Master of Puppets

Sales and label issues
I found the album's first week sales published in Spin, but I think they are highly inflated. To have 250,000 records sold and debut no. 29 is not making any sense.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 12:43, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The peak was 29; it debuted on March 29, 1986 at #128 . To cite a better source for sales, Billboard reported the first three weeks of sales as 300,000 (p. 40; on page 80, it has the Top Pop Albums chart for May 10, 1986, showing the album peaking at 29) Dan56 (talk) 13:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll insert that later. The second thing was the record label. The background section says that Metallica signed with Elektra for a major release album, but the intro cites Asylum as the label. That doesn't make much logic.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 13:07, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * According to the RIAA, Asylum Records released the album on February 24, 1986 . Since they're the trade organization representing the music industry, I'd trust them. The section doesn't say anything about a major release album deal; Elektra was merged into Asylum as I mentioned here. Dan56 (talk) 13:42, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * First of all, it is not a fan site, but the official web site of the band. Secondly, if it's published by RIAA it doesn't necessarily mean it contains no errors. And read the first sentence "In the fall of 1984, Metallica signed with Electra Records".--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 13:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Firstly, it's a fan site Just because there's a .com domain name attached to the name of the band doesn't make it an official website. Secondly, do you have any legitimate reason to suspect the RIAA made an error? Lastly, you said two comments ago that the section said "Metallica signed with Elektra for a major release album"; the section doesn't say anything more than the band signing with Elektra, which I made clear enough was merged into Asylum in the early 70s. Dan56 (talk) 14:15, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Well why don't they say "Metallica signed with Asylum Records" instead of Elektra? And why on my CD is written Elektra instead of Asylum? --Вик Ретлхед (talk) 14:19, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Why does it matter what "they" say about the band being signed instead of the album being released? As I showed before, the back cover shows the publishing and copyright as "Elektra/Asylum Records". Dan56 (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * See, even on the LP is written Electra. A possible solution might be "Elektra/Asylum Records".--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 16:06, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Same on LP record, (P) 1986 Elektra / Asylum Records . Dan56 (talk) 16:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * So, do you agree with my propose "Elektra/Asylum" as the label?--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 16:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'm going to make a footnote in the infobox, although the RIAA source still recognizes Asylum. Dan56 (talk) 17:00, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Improving the article
Is this review reliable enough to be used in the critical reception? Also the "Charts" section can be adapted from the Metallica discography article.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 23:43, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I would guess no, since the author Luca Signorelli doesn't appear to be anyone notable Dan56 (talk) 10:21, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

What improper material is being used? Is it the samples or the cover?--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 16:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I remember in the mid-1990s Metallica shortened a bunch of their songs, including "Master of Puppets", when they played them live. I don't knwo if they still do that, but shouldn't it be mentioned in the article? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 02:05, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I assume you might be thinking of "The Four Horsemen". That one is usually played live without the middle section. "Master of Puppets" is always performed top-to-bottom, but if I remember correctly, it used to be played in a medley with "Welcome Home (Sanitarium)".--Retrohead (talk) 19:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? I remember reading an interview at the time where they said they were cutting down some of the longer songs because they were less fun live for the fans than for the band. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 21:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll look around the net to see if we have those statements. From my personal knowledge, the only parts that were omitted were the intros to "Battery" and "Damage" because they were recorded with specific gear.--Retrohead (talk) 09:07, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

I think an article shouldn't contain hyperbolic descriptions such as "epic" in the sentence "Referring to the epic proportions of the songs". In my opinion this lowers the scientific value of the statement. Anyone care to share thoughts on this? PeterDeFrankrijker (talk) 09:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * You're right—"lengthy" or something would be better. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 10:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Peer review by Curly Turkey

 * The lead needs work (no description of the music!), but let's leave that until the body's finished. I can't stand genre warriors, but it might be better to define the album as thrash rather than just heavy metal, given its reputation as one of the difinitive thrash albums.
 * Do you have any info on equipment? On what guitars & amps they used?
 * I sold my vinyl long ago, but isn't this the album where they expressed their love of the Ninja Turtles in the liner notes, and had Ninja Turtles painted on their guitars or something? I think there might have been something about EC horror comics as well (didn't they influence the lyrics?)
 * You might want to flesh out "Background and recording" with a capsule history of both the band and thrash metal—say, a paragraph or so. Given that this album is considered a key thrash album, that context really is necessary.
 * You'll need to mention what else was going on in thrash that year: it was the year of Reign in Blood and Peace Sells, after all.
 * Do your sources mention the similarity between the opening riff of "Master of Puppets" and "War Pigs"? The internet seems aware of this, but a quick search doesn't turn up a RS for me.
 * There'll need to be something on the odd meters—there are things like 5/8 and 15/4 in "Master of Puppets", and the main riff to "Sanitarium" especially stands out by being in 5/4 or something.
 * Here's something interesting.
 * Hopefully we'll get some sound samples
 * To be continued ... Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 04:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey Turkey, thanks for participating in the improvement. I know the page is missing a 'Music style' analysis, so thanks for the link above. I really regret that I lost the access to Mick Wall's biography at Scribd, which was the foundation for the background in the current state. I have an idea to try to merge the 'Touring' and 'Live performances' into one section, and reduce or paraphrase some of the extensive Ulrich quotes. I'll be doing an additional research on the lyrics and artwork. Thanks again and good luck with Sad Wings of Destiny. Look forward to see that at GA or FA!--Retrohead (talk) 16:41, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. A short reply:
 * Metallica thank amongst many others also "Teenage Mutant Ninja-Turtles; and most of all…Edna!!!!".
 * Yes, there are lots of different time signatures, although most songs are in 4/4. Instead they make extended use of either shortened or stretched bars at the very end of a melodic or rhythmic line. For instance, in Master..., they go from three continous bars of 4/4 to a final bar of 6/8 (in the riff before the verses). Same thing in the main riff of Sanitarium, where they go from two bars of 4/4 to the last with 2/4. They also do lots of tricks/illusions with the whole feeling of beats being skipped/added, when the bars in reality consist of equally amount of beats. Listen to the very opening bars of Disposable Heroes; the time signature is 6/4, but the fourth and final bar feels a bit off. Therefore we feel like getting back on track with "the wrong foot". Same thing happens with the powerful riff in Orion (the one that fades out the song). I find it difficult to hold the beat steady at the very last bar because of this syncopation going on in both guitars and drums. But it's all 4/4. Thuen (talk) 23:01, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, since you both appear to be knowledgable in music theory, I wanted to ask whether Joel McIver made a mistake when he described "Battery" as a mid–tempo song in his biography on Metallica. I've measured approximately 180 beats per minute by comparing the drum track to a metronome on YouTube, and the link to the script above offers a speed of 196 bpm. So, does McIver's criteria for fast tempos seem unreasonable?--Retrohead (talk) 23:07, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, "fast", "slow", and "mid" are all relative terms—I wonder what McIver was comparing to. I guess it's slower than "Damage, Inc.", but faster than "Sanitarium"?  If McIver's the only one calling it mid-tempo, I'd just ignore it.
 * Also, counting it out, I think the main riff in "Sanitarium" is (something like) alternating 6/4 and 4/4—there are twleve beats in the ascending arpeggio bit, and eight in the closing bit. This site interprets that as 10/4; this one calls it "quintuple meter".  I'm sure a TAB book should be easy to come by that would give the meters, but we'd need a prose source noting the meters to include it in the article.  Probably a guitar magazine somewhere has an article on this stuff. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:30, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * In the authorized guitar score, Battery's introduction is marked "Moderately slow: 1/4 = 75 bpm". When the song takes off it goes to "Fast: 1/4 = 190". That's the same tempo as Damage, Inc. - and it's ... fast! I believe McIver talks about the Interlude (after the second verse): "…before settling into a perfect, mid-tempo thrash rhythm which has a slightly eerie, off-beat edge that keeps the listener's attention focused" (page 142). Although the tempo is the same here, the very feeling we get as listeners are in fact half the speed. This is of course due to the (simple) guitar melody and the fact that Ulrich now only marks the first and third beat in each bar. Thuen (talk) 23:37, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There are lots of ways to interpret music when it comes to scores. The official edition (Cherry Lane Music) writes the Sanitarium melody as two bars with 4/4 - followed by a final one with 2/4. Thuen (talk) 23:43, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Two bars of 4/4—sorry, I misread you, I thought you were saying it was alternating 4/4 and 2/4, which is not possible. Yeah, it all works out to the same in the end, although I don't think that way of slicing it up really follows the "logic" of the riff. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 00:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree. In my head it actually works better with first bar being 4/4, second as 2/4, then returning to 4/4. Thuen (talk) 00:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * He highlighted "Damage, Inc." and "Disposable Heroes" as the fast tracks, so I assume he compared it to those two. Almost forgot to ask if you have a better idea for wording the lyrical meaning of "Damage, Inc."? Conformist links to a religious follower, but the lyrical meaning points conformist as an antipode of a rebel, or a person who follows the social norms.--Retrohead (talk) 23:45, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I think you're looking for conformity. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 00:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Encycmet.com believes it to be about senseless violence and destruction. Others believe it to be about major corporations who will do anything to get what they want, the military using men as tools or even extreme brainwashed religious groups ("living on your knees, conformity"). To be honest, the lyrics fit all of these… As a closing song, I feel it sums up the artwork really nice. Maybe the song is about all the "Masters of Puppets" out there, both in the real world and inside our minds? Thuen (talk) 00:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't know how gib a deal it is, but you might want to look at MOS:SEASON. It might be better to give a range of dates (e.g June to September) if you have them. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 22:47, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

"seminal"
Seminal is such a loaded and overly-peacocky term. It's such a heavyweight word that it needs a strong source to back it up, and probably best used in an attributed quote. - SchroCat (talk) 19:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Even then, it should be avoided in the lead unless the quote in and of itself is notable. We don't cherrypick POV quotes for the lead. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 20:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Attributing Master of Puppets with the word 'seminal' isn't fallacious. It isn't peacocky. It isn't even indulgent. This album is seminal. What does seminal mean? That it greatly influenced later works. That isn't ostensible; inspiration drawn from this masterpiece is palpable in many other subsequent releases by a multitude of different thrash metal bands. For a band so regularly accredited with being one of the first four pioneering bands of the genre, it seems somewhat quizzical to me that the inclusion of the word 'seminal' in this article is proving to be so schismatic. It isn't a 'verisimilitudinous', or 'magniloquent', it's a word that music aficionados should be very well familiar with. Describing it as 'influential', on the other hand, is a bit more nebulous: What did it influence, how, and to what degree? 'Seminal' answers all the questions that 'influential' can't. It influenced later works, in a positive fashion, and to a great degree. Want a strong source to back it up? How about this: Virtually every 'top 100 heavy metal albums' list includes this album in the top twenty, at least. Many bands often cite the work as one of their longest abiding musical inspirations, as well.

Alterations of wording are enacted for the sake of cogency--to be clear, precise, and concise. 'Seminal' performs this function with much greater aplomb than 'influential'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghost Lourde (talk • contribs) 22:46, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


 * As per the above, come up with some reliable sources (plural) which state it. It not, it's nothing more than WP:OR. - SchroCat (talk) 22:52, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Lead mention of singles
I'd like to note that it says "Instead of releasing a single or video to promote Master of Puppets..." I assume it must be talking about time in advance of the album's release? Because in fact, there was one single released to promote it (title track) but it was four months after the album's release date. I was wondering if we could make some tweaks to this part to make it more clear. DannyMusicEditor (talk) 14:21, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

James Hetfield Lead Guitars
J. Hetfield plays two lead parts on album. Read the booklet before deleting my contribution. http://i99.fastpic.ru/big/2018/0109/e7/9134154eab508744e40a429e1f7693e7.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.241.143.168 (talk) 08:44, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Deluxe Edition
This article includes no information on the 2017 Deluxe Edition. The issue is being discussed here. Charles Essie (talk) 17:34, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Beats per minute
The bpm for battery is for the snare while the bpm for master of puppets and leper messiah is for the hi-hat Whehejtjrhwhaueje (talk) 09:49, 28 January 2020 (UTC)