Vektor
Havok
Evile
Lazarus AD

Nah. Big 4 of Thrash.
By new they are, well, young/ish bands.

So I guess it;d be like this

Trivium
Machine Head

Cant actually think of any more at the moment.

Considering the fact that there will never again be another "Big Four Of Thrash Metal",
still I think the next four bands come close to the original ones:

* Havok
* Legion Of The Damned
* Merciless Death
(reminds me a lot of old Slayer - "Show No Mercy" and "Hell Awaits" period)
* Warbringer

I don't even know if i know any "new" thrash bands but let see

Gama Bomb
Evile
Fueld by Fire
Bonded by blood

guess that's my list, correct me if i've taken an "old" band in my list

Written by Ultraussie on 01.06.2011 at 08:57

Nah. Big 4 of Thrash.
By new they are, well, young/ish bands.

So I guess it;d be like this

Trivium
Machine Head

Cant actually think of any more at the moment.

You can't be serious... Trivium really....

Did you even look at what thrash is becoming or what thrash was ?? Cos IMO Trivium is an example of what not to do if you wanna be a thrash band lol
I mean look at Warbringer, Violater, Pessimist, Rattlehead, Evile, Toxic Holocaust, Vindicator, Municipal Waste and so on... that IMO is thrash metal.

Machine head?

"new"

they've been around for almost 20 years... and i seem to recall a rather large detour in the mid/late 90's. The Burning Red remains the ONLY album i've ever plunked down $15 for and not even finished.

Written by Ultraussie on 01.06.2011 at 08:57

Nah. Big 4 of Thrash.
By new they are, well, young/ish bands.

So I guess it;d be like this

Trivium
Machine Head

Cant actually think of any more at the moment.

Written by BitterCOld on 06.06.2011 at 01:32

Machine head?

I love when people think of them as some newly formed band because they heard The Blackening once and assumed it was a debut.

Does anybody even know Flynn helped create the masterpiece that is Eternal Nightmare?! Goddammit.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 06.06.2011 at 02:13

Written by BitterCOld on 06.06.2011 at 01:32

Machine head?

I love when people think of them as some newly formed band because they heard The Blackening once and assumed it was a debut.

Does anybody even know Flynn helped create the masterpiece that is Eternal Nightmare?! Goddammit.

imbo Eternal Nightmare is better than any thrash record released in the past decade...

Agreed.

In all honesty, the comparison is pointless. there never will be another "Big Four"... it's all wannabe attempts to somehow tie the current movement to the impact of the past. all you have to do to realize how sad and pitiful this nostalgia-based action is go to the band page and use "thrash" as your filter.

i like Municipal Waste. I dig Warbringer - enough so that I bought one of the dudes a beer the last time in town, and would have bought 'em more, but opted to buy their merch instead.

however:

metallica
megadeth
slayer
anthrax
exodus
kreator
sodom
overkill
annihilator
death angel
forbidden
artillery
coroner
voivod
nuclear assault
sadus
flotsam and jetsam
dark angel
vio-lence
sacred reich
whiplash
holy terror
heathen
hirax

and these are just the straight-up thrash acts, never mind "blends" like DRI, SOD, Agent Steel, Suicidal Tendencies, Possessed, Exhorder, Exciter

think about where the current groups stand up to that.

there is no "new big four". sorry. there's a nice little thrash revival going on, i like the bands, buy some albums, see some shows... but it doesn't compare.

Thread over.

OMG I like how they say (Yeah the new bands are ok... not what it used to be) Do you guys actually fucking go to shows and buy those albums I mean what the hell y'all f-ing talking about. The guys rock Live... they put out great albums, they're even more violent than it used to be, the music quality is still there and for some bands its even better than ever, they don't go mainstream (Something most purists rage about all the time) and the guys don't look like post emo retarded morons ... I MEAN WTF do you want We're not talking about creating a new genre lol its good ol' f-ing thrash revamped, obviously its not the big four it already exists ! BUT OMG can't believe so few ppl actually like the new wave, maybe they're all just not interested in it and don't take the time to actually peek into it. (BTW I take that Big four comparison as an ''actual good new bands'' not literally a big four )

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:26

OMG I like how they say (Yeah the new bands are ok... not what it used to be) Do you guys actually fucking go to shows and buy those albums I mean what the hell y'all f-ing talking about. The guys rock Live... they put out great albums, they're even more violent than it used to be, the music quality is still there and for some bands its even better than ever, they don't go mainstream (Something most purists rage about all the time) and the guys don't look like post emo retarded morons ... I MEAN WTF do you want We're not talking about creating a new genre lol its good ol' f-ing thrash revamped, obviously its not the big four it already exists ! BUT OMG

i believe i mentioned buying albums (i've reviewed MW), and going to shows (seen Warbringer, and i believe i mentioned buying one of the Laux brothers a beer). i've seen Bonded By Blood. I've seen Machine Head, owned their first 2.5 albums* and my roommate caught the drumstick at the show they played which was eventually Slayer's "Live Intrusion" video (Mesa Amphitheater, '94). Like OMG.

still no comparison.

Written by BitterCOld on 06.06.2011 at 09:32

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:26

OMG I like how they say (Yeah the new bands are ok... not what it used to be) Do you guys actually fucking go to shows and buy those albums I mean what the hell y'all f-ing talking about. The guys rock Live... they put out great albums, they're even more violent than it used to be, the music quality is still there and for some bands its even better than ever, they don't go mainstream (Something most purists rage about all the time) and the guys don't look like post emo retarded morons ... I MEAN WTF do you want We're not talking about creating a new genre lol its good ol' f-ing thrash revamped, obviously its not the big four it already exists ! BUT OMG

i believe i mentioned buying albums (i've reviewed MW), and going to shows (seen Warbringer, and i believe i mentioned buying one of the Laux brothers a beer). i've seen Bonded By Blood. I've seen Machine Head, owned their first 2.5 albums* and my roommate caught the drumstick at the show they played which was eventually Slayer's "Live Intrusion" video (Mesa Amphitheater, '94). Like OMG.

still no comparison.

Then tell me, just tell me, whats in all the new releases and new bands that is missing... Cause' I've been listening again and again trying to get why ppl actually don't pay much attention to it and simply can't understand. In fact im starting to prefer the new scene to the older one. I just don't understand, is it because you're trying to find a new sound ? What are your expectations.

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:36

Then tell me, just tell me, whats in all the new releases and new bands that is missing... Cause' I've been listening again and again trying to get why ppl actually don't pay much attention to it and simply can't understand. In fact im starting to prefer the new scene to the older one. I just don't understand, is it because you're trying to find a new sound ? What are your expectations.

for starters, innovation?

additionally it's this absurd notion of trying to tie current trends with past ones.

it happened then organically, now it feels forced. pushed. the thrash equivalent of neo-hippies trying to capture the spirit of the late 60's (groovy man, peace, far out) by glomming on. it's not isolated to just metal, it's the constant push to somehow make the current better than the past. it's a lame attempt by the "everyone gets a trophy" generation to somehow validate themselves.

you're 20. you don't get it, you won't get it, you can't get it. the fact you are comparing the "new scene to the older one" just demonstrates this with crystal clarity. is there a current scene? an actual scene? (see: Bay Area, with regular bills featuring a fistful of bands i mentioned above.)

just like the neo-hippies and neo-punks. hell, even death metal and black metal.

there is a spark and certain madness that is at the center of any creative movement, like anything can happen. I missed it with thrash, it coalesced before i found it... but i experienced it first hand with death metal.

neo-thrash isn't the equivalent of Woodstock 2000 or whatever, a pathetic cash grab in disguise - it's legit homage to the prior generation. it's fun, i'm glad it's happening, but it is not the same.

Written by BitterCOld on 06.06.2011 at 09:47

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:36

Then tell me, just tell me, whats in all the new releases and new bands that is missing... Cause' I've been listening again and again trying to get why ppl actually don't pay much attention to it and simply can't understand. In fact im starting to prefer the new scene to the older one. I just don't understand, is it because you're trying to find a new sound ? What are your expectations.

for starters, innovation?

additionally it's this absurd notion of trying to tie current trends with past ones.

it happened then organically, now it feels forced. pushed. the thrash equivalent of neo-hippies trying to capture the spirit of the late 60's (groovy man, peace, far out) by glomming on. it's not isolated to just metal, it's the constant push to somehow make the current better than the past. it's a lame attempt by the "everyone gets a trophy" generation to somehow validate themselves.

you're 20. you don't get it, you won't get it, you can't get it. the fact you are comparing the "new scene to the older one" just demonstrates this with crystal clarity. is there a current scene? an actual scene? (see: Bay Area, with regular bills featuring a fistful of bands i mentioned above.)

just like the neo-hippies and neo-punks. hell, even death metal and black metal.

there is a spark and certain madness that is at the center of any creative movement, like anything can happen. I missed it with thrash, it coalesced before i found it... but i experienced it first hand with death metal.

neo-thrash isn't the equivalent of Woodstock 2000 or whatever, a pathetic cash grab in disguise - it's legit homage to the prior generation. it's fun, i'm glad it's happening, but it is not the same.

Ok so... firstly, saying that because Im 20 I can't understand is generalizing and clearly false, Maybe you don't want me to understand...
Second, Its not about the actual or past scene, lets just say its all the big same scene ok ? Why would you give them less credit than older bands ? and for the innovative part, sur its still thrash never said it wasn't never said they were groundbreaking but something that is good... stays good, and are they trying to do better? Well of course they are they wanna push the limit of a genre they loved and praised... that they grew up with, can't blame them I grew with that aswell. Now to tell me that it is not Woodstock 2000, seriously who cares ? I mean you listen to em and enjoy thats about it. Look at those wonderful albums: Waking Into Nightmares (Warbringer) / Necromantic Maelstrom (Lich King) / Call To War (Pessimist) / Visual Violence (Pitiful Reign) / Beyond The Permafrost (Skeletonwitch)... yeah I could name more and all in the 2000's.. no obviously not ground breaking thrash already exists, but you can certainly find a new sound a new drive and pretty much feel it in every album mentioned. Anyways I'm sure we could debate even more, but I still don't understand the lack of interest in awesome bands, if you like thrash you like it all the way the old like the new.

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:56

Written by BitterCOld on 06.06.2011 at 09:47

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:36

Then tell me, just tell me, whats in all the new releases and new bands that is missing... Cause' I've been listening again and again trying to get why ppl actually don't pay much attention to it and simply can't understand. In fact im starting to prefer the new scene to the older one. I just don't understand, is it because you're trying to find a new sound ? What are your expectations.

for starters, innovation?

additionally it's this absurd notion of trying to tie current trends with past ones.

it happened then organically, now it feels forced. pushed. the thrash equivalent of neo-hippies trying to capture the spirit of the late 60's (groovy man, peace, far out) by glomming on. it's not isolated to just metal, it's the constant push to somehow make the current better than the past. it's a lame attempt by the "everyone gets a trophy" generation to somehow validate themselves.

you're 20. you don't get it, you won't get it, you can't get it. the fact you are comparing the "new scene to the older one" just demonstrates this with crystal clarity. is there a current scene? an actual scene? (see: Bay Area, with regular bills featuring a fistful of bands i mentioned above.)

just like the neo-hippies and neo-punks. hell, even death metal and black metal.

there is a spark and certain madness that is at the center of any creative movement, like anything can happen. I missed it with thrash, it coalesced before i found it... but i experienced it first hand with death metal.

neo-thrash isn't the equivalent of Woodstock 2000 or whatever, a pathetic cash grab in disguise - it's legit homage to the prior generation. it's fun, i'm glad it's happening, but it is not the same.

Ok so... firstly, saying that because Im 20 I can't understand is generalizing and clearly false, Maybe you don't want me to understand...
Second, Its not about the actual or past scene, lets just say its all the big same scene ok ? Why would you give them less credit than older bands ? and for the innovative part, sur its still thrash never said it wasn't never said they were groundbreaking but something that is good... stays good, and are they trying to do better? Well of course they are they wanna push the limit of a genre they loved and praised... that they grew up with, can't blame them I grew with that aswell. Now to tell me that it is not Woodstock 2000, seriously who cares ? I mean you listen to em and enjoy thats about it. Look at those wonderful albums: Waking Into Nightmares (Warbringer) / Necromantic Maelstrom (Lich King) / Call To War (Pessimist) / Visual Violence (Pitiful Reign) / Beyond The Permafrost (Skeletonwitch)... yeah I could name more and all in the 2000's.. no obviously not ground breaking thrash already exists, but you can certainly find a new sound a new drive and pretty much feel it in every album mentioned. Anyways I'm sure we could debate even more, but I still don't understand the lack of interest in awesome bands, if you like thrash you like it all the way the old like the new.

you can't understand because you're 20... and it happened nearly 30 years ago. unless you score a Wayback Machine you simply cannot have been there as it all unfolded. i don't even think you grasp what a "scene" is. it's not just a bunch of records/cd's/mps3s. thrash is a movement. the clubs, record stores, bands and fans that comprised the Bay Area in the 80's was a scene.

and what point did i say i wasn't interested in current bands? i just don't like the attempt to somehow link them to the past with this "new big four of thrash" concept.

but i suppose all of this left vapor trails.

When did Thrash become ideological?

Written by BitterCOld on 06.06.2011 at 18:18

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:56

Written by BitterCOld on 06.06.2011 at 09:47

Written by Guib on 06.06.2011 at 09:36

Then tell me, just tell me, whats in all the new releases and new bands that is missing... Cause' I've been listening again and again trying to get why ppl actually don't pay much attention to it and simply can't understand. In fact im starting to prefer the new scene to the older one. I just don't understand, is it because you're trying to find a new sound ? What are your expectations.

for starters, innovation?

additionally it's this absurd notion of trying to tie current trends with past ones.

it happened then organically, now it feels forced. pushed. the thrash equivalent of neo-hippies trying to capture the spirit of the late 60's (groovy man, peace, far out) by glomming on. it's not isolated to just metal, it's the constant push to somehow make the current better than the past. it's a lame attempt by the "everyone gets a trophy" generation to somehow validate themselves.

you're 20. you don't get it, you won't get it, you can't get it. the fact you are comparing the "new scene to the older one" just demonstrates this with crystal clarity. is there a current scene? an actual scene? (see: Bay Area, with regular bills featuring a fistful of bands i mentioned above.)

just like the neo-hippies and neo-punks. hell, even death metal and black metal.

there is a spark and certain madness that is at the center of any creative movement, like anything can happen. I missed it with thrash, it coalesced before i found it... but i experienced it first hand with death metal.

neo-thrash isn't the equivalent of Woodstock 2000 or whatever, a pathetic cash grab in disguise - it's legit homage to the prior generation. it's fun, i'm glad it's happening, but it is not the same.

Ok so... firstly, saying that because Im 20 I can't understand is generalizing and clearly false, Maybe you don't want me to understand...
Second, Its not about the actual or past scene, lets just say its all the big same scene ok ? Why would you give them less credit than older bands ? and for the innovative part, sur its still thrash never said it wasn't never said they were groundbreaking but something that is good... stays good, and are they trying to do better? Well of course they are they wanna push the limit of a genre they loved and praised... that they grew up with, can't blame them I grew with that aswell. Now to tell me that it is not Woodstock 2000, seriously who cares ? I mean you listen to em and enjoy thats about it. Look at those wonderful albums: Waking Into Nightmares (Warbringer) / Necromantic Maelstrom (Lich King) / Call To War (Pessimist) / Visual Violence (Pitiful Reign) / Beyond The Permafrost (Skeletonwitch)... yeah I could name more and all in the 2000's.. no obviously not ground breaking thrash already exists, but you can certainly find a new sound a new drive and pretty much feel it in every album mentioned. Anyways I'm sure we could debate even more, but I still don't understand the lack of interest in awesome bands, if you like thrash you like it all the way the old like the new.

you can't understand because you're 20... and it happened nearly 30 years ago. unless you score a Wayback Machine you simply cannot have been there as it all unfolded. i don't even think you grasp what a "scene" is. it's not just a bunch of records/cd's/mps3s. thrash is a movement. the clubs, record stores, bands and fans that comprised the Bay Area in the 80's was a scene.

and what point did i say i wasn't interested in current bands? i just don't like the attempt to somehow link them to the past with this "new big four of thrash" concept.

but i suppose all of this left vapor trails.

Exactly my point, like Lit. Metalhead said... Since when music became Ideological. You call a scene what you believe is one. You get a scene when you get music... no matter the clubs no matter if people gather to drink a beer and brawl after the show. Im talking music here thats all, and seriously I don't have to go 30 years back to figure that we still have a scene RIGHT NOW. Maybe you don't like the concept of the big four... for sure. But the fact that the scene is still there and getting stronger than ever is undeniable. Of course, if all the old Thrash lover start complaining about the fact that youngsters like us start a new thrash movement, it won't help it. Thats all im saying. You refuse the scene or its improvement because of nostalgia, in my book it ain't a good starting point for new bands.

"stronger than ever" - lmfao.

there is good thrash out now, but the movement or scene is certainly not "stronger than ever."

it's funny you call my refusal to acknowledge the current movement as superior as nostalgia. the current movement exists because of nostalgia. irony.

Written by BitterCOld on 07.06.2011 at 04:42

"stronger than ever" - lmfao.

there is good thrash out now, but the movement or scene is certainly not "stronger than ever."

it's funny you call my refusal to acknowledge the current movement as superior as nostalgia. the current movement exists because of nostalgia. irony.

Oh sure, maybe nostalgia played its part... but I believe perfecting the sound played a far greater one. And yeah to me its stronger than ever... look at all those new bands actually appearing out of f-ing nowhere, I mean there was a serious gap before that new wave. Theres a bunch of young talented musicians just wanting their scene to be recognized. And for the quality, lot of them actually play better music now probably because of other sub-genre influences.

There is no point in continuing this. it's a point you won't get and i won't bend on. there is a resurgence. hooray. lots of bands. swell. there is no "new big four", just like there will never be another Iron Maiden.

but for fun, MSA 2010 Thrash Voting

Old music > new music.

Moving on.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 07.06.2011 at 05:06

Old music > new music.

Moving on.

This is opinion lol

@BitterCold: And for the awards... personally it would have been something else for me.

Blasphemy...Not the band of course but more like in the literal sense of the word . These prestigious three words "The Big Four" were first used back in 1989. At that time, Metallica had already torn the world to specks with four masterpieces, as you all may know; Kill 'Em All, Ride The Lightning, Master Of Puppets and ...And Justice For All. Megadeth had released three records, none of which is as good as RIP but still, back then, those records were superior to the plain metal-ish so-called heavy sound of that era. Slayer's Reign In Blood and Hell Awaits as well as Anthrax's Spreading The Disease and Among The Living dealt the final blow into hurling those bands to stardom and thus, becoming gods.

We may not agree about the "The Big Four" theory, as many of you think that bands like Exodus and Overkill should have been part of the thrash mouvement, and that's understandable. But for crying out loud, don't compare or even try to lump in the same box the likes of Metallica, a beast which refused to die after 30 years of metal fucking madness, to newfangled bands, regardless of how good they might seem, because it wouldn't be fair to them (refers to the big four).

No disrespect but when your "precious" bands release records as mind-blowing as Ride The Lightning then we'll talk about the alleged successors of the big four, but until then we should just enjoy them being still around. Personally, I modestly believe that no band is fit to hold a candle to The Big Four...and to be honest, i don't think there will ever be...

Written by Mindheist on 08.06.2011 at 06:04

Blasphemy...Not the band of course but more like in the literal sense of the word . These prestigious three words "The Big Four" were first used back in 1989. At that time, Metallica had already torn the world to specks with four masterpieces, as you all may know; Kill 'Em All, Ride The Lightning, Master Of Puppets and ...And Justice For All. Megadeth had released three records, none of which is as good as RIP but still, back then, those records were superior to the plain metal-ish so-called heavy sound of that era. Slayer's Reign In Blood and Hell Awaits as well as Anthrax's Spreading The Disease and Among The Living dealt the final blow into hurling those bands to stardom and thus, becoming gods.

We may not agree about the "The Big Four" theory, as many of you think that bands like Exodus and Overkill should have been part of the thrash mouvement, and that's understandable. But for crying out loud, don't compare or even try to lump in the same box the likes of Metallica, a beast which refused to die after 30 years of metal fucking madness, to newfangled bands, regardless of how good they might seem, because it wouldn't be fair to them (refers to the big four).

No disrespect but when your "precious" bands release records as mind-blowing as Ride The Lightning then we'll talk about the alleged successors of the big four, but until then we should just enjoy them being still around. Personally, I modestly believe that no band is fit to hold a candle to The Big Four...and to be honest, i don't think there will ever be...

There are albums that are as mind-blowing as Ride The Lightning. Thats my opinion yours may differ but don't generalize. And for ''The Big Four'' theory, I agree that its not the appropriate term to discribe the new wave of thrash.

So... Since theres no more discussion and I see that someone started a new thread about a BIG FOUR (something that has been done more than once in here) im gonna bump this thread up to the top. But this time we'll try not to argue about Past/Present Thrash metal scene since its useless I don't think we'll ever agree. Also lets put it clear that its only a comparison that we're doing for the fun of it. Obviously there will never be another BIG FOUR OF THRASH. We all know that... so stop posting that we shouldn't compare... its just for fun gosh.

What a ridiculous discussion. There can be a big 4 of the Thrash Revival if people want there to be.

My top 4: Essence, Warpath, Hatchet , Exeloume

If that's the case, then:

Evile
Toxic Holocaust
Warbringer
Municipal Waste.