Talk:Garage Inc.

Writing Credits

Could someone please fill in the first name for the "Smith" listed for "Blitzkrieg"? It's so pointless, stupid and annoying to only be able to see the last names, and I couldn't find out the first name anywhere.

--Rock Soldier 16:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I did a little investigating. There seems to be a discrepancy in who actually holds the writing credits for the song. Metallica's website states (Jones / Smith / Sirotto). On the cd The Metallic-Era by Neat Metal Records, the song is credited to (Jones / Ross / Sirotto). I've emailed both Metallica's webmaster and Blitzkrieg's Band Info email addresses. If I get a response I'll post it in this discussion page. If I do get a final answer I doubt I'll be able to use it in the article though. Rockfang 23:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

If another CD credits it to (Jones / Ross / Sirotto), that's almost definately referring to Brian Ross, and I'm guessing that the "Smith" is some sort of misprint for his name. I've looked all over, and all I've been able to find credits the song to (Jones / Jim Sirotto / Smith), and I was only able to figure out who the "Jones" was based on the band's page. I looked there too for a "Smith", but couldn't find it, so I'm highly guessing the version that said "Ross" was right, since Brian Ross the frontman of the band, and would more likely be involved in the writing of the song than some person named Smith whose first name can't even be found anywhere on the internet. Why shouldn't you be able to list the name, though, if you do get a final answer? He wrote the song, he's credited to it, and everyone else's name is listed. I don't see what exception should be made.

--Rock Soldier (talk) 22:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I still haven't gotten an answer back from either group I emailed. If I do get a response back what would I put in the article as a reference? --Rockfang (talk) 22:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't bother with a reference. There's nothing to say that the name you put isn't accurate, and there's nothing to prove you wrong. Just a name will do, any who question it can ask you and you can explain the situation to them.

--Rock Soldier (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Grammy for Best Hard Rock Performance

This article, and others through redirect, shows Metallica as winning the Grammy for Best Hard Rock Performance in 1999. The award is shown as a 2000 award on the Best Hard Rock Performance page as directed here. Obviously one article shows incorrect facts. My76Strat (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I have contacted the webmaster at Metallica's official site and confirmed the award as a 2000 award. I made the subsequent change and this article now correctly shows the award as a 2000 award. My76Strat (talk) 15:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Burton backing vocals

Cliff Burton did not sing on "Am I Evil" of "Blit" because there are no backing vocals on the track. Where do people get this crap from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.226.95.18 (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Title

Do anybody know where the title "Garage Inc." come from? 134.109.148.66 (talk) 07:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Garage Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150926093107/http://www.metallica.com/releases/garage-inc.asp to http://www.metallica.com/releases/garage-inc.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:04, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Last album featuring Jason

Why does the page for Garage Inc. and S&M both say each album is the last album to feature Jason Newsted as the bassist for Metallica? Surely two albums released at different times can't both be theblast album to feature him. Hatecopter (talk) 23:20, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Why there is no indication at the beginning that this is a double album (both studio and compilation)?

Normally it is a usual thing, ie.: “Physical Graffiti is the sixth studio album by the English rock band Led Zeppelin. Released as a double album on 24 February 1975 in the United States and on 28 February 1975 in the United Kingdom, it was the group's first album to be released under their new label, Swan Song Records.” or “The Beatles (commonly referred to as The White Album) is the ninth studio album and only double album by the English rock band the Beatles, released on 22 November 1968.”

Moreover, if you look at Ummagumma by Pink Floyd, it is also a double album: first disc is a live album and second disc is a studio album. To make it more interesting it is counted simultaneously as 1st live album and 4th studio album.

Why this in not a case regarding Garage Inc.? The first disc is a studio album of new material (albeit covers, but still it counts, just like Blue & Lonesome (23rd studio album) by The Rolling Stones, “The Spaghetti Incident?” (5th studio album) by Guns N’ Roses, Under Cover (9th studio album) by Ozzy Osbourne, Undisputed Attitude (7th studio album) by Slayer or Turning to Crime (22nd studio album) by Deep Purple) recorded in studio while the second one is a compilation across eleven years (from 1984 to 1995) of previously released material on (partially), for instance, The $5.98 E.P.: Garage Days Re-Revisited.

So why it is not counted as Metallica’s 8th studio album and 1st compilation album?

Conclusion: it should be written as “double cover album by Metallica, with first disc being their 8th studio album, while the second one being 1st compilation album.”

There is no reason to “merge” it as a compilation since 1st disc in entirely of previously unreleased material (meaning: brand new, just like 5 examples above).

I mean seriously: why it is like that?

~2026-39040-26 (talk) 07:18, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Hey there. I've found that Garage Inc. houses an interesting place in Metallica's discography, because you're absolutely right, the album was a project of its own. It is a group of new studio recordings (recorded in 1998) and a collection of previously released covers. But the band (and secondary sources) vary on whether or not to treat it as an official studio project. For instance, the album is included in Spin magazine's list of every Metallica album from worst to best, yet Ultimate Classic Rock and Metal Hammer do not (although UCR weirdly includes Lulu). Conversely, in Paul Brannigan & Ian Winwood's Into the Black: The Inside Story of Metallica 1991–2014 (2014), they say about Garage Inc.: "the loving flourishes with which Metallica stain the canvas of what is in effect a studio album in its own right elevate their creation above such dismissive phraseology" (p. 102). In Mick Wall's Enter Night, he does call Garage Inc. a "double CD", but also says St. Anger was their "next full-bore album" after Reload. Rolling Stone's original review of Garage Inc. here calls it a "new double-disc set". It irks me that Metallica's website doesn't officially describe what it is. I imagine a remastered set for it is coming soon, so hopefully they will release an official statement categorizing it. I'm open to more input though, because I agree with your statement that there are other instances of covers albums included in studio counts (i.e. Pin Ups, Renegades, and Rock 'n' Roll), but none of those had previously released songs on them... NegativeMP1 What do you think? – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 14:32, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply.

“It irks me that Metallica's website doesn't officially describe what it is. I imagine a remastered set for it is coming soon, so hopefully they will release an official statement categorizing it.”

One thing is Metallica (most likely pronounced [məˈtæl.ɪ.kə] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Metallica#Please_add_pronuncation_(/m%C9%9B%CB%88t%CA%B0%C9%99.l%C9%AA.k%C9%99/?))) lists Garage Inc. as a primary album on their website (https://www.metallica.com/releases/albums/#primary).

Second thing is I do not believe in this “their official statement what this actually is” (looks like it should be the one I mentioned above). I do not think it works like that. Let’s say they will categorize it as something oddly weird: will it make it stand on Wikipedia as exactly what they told us?

By definition an LP (long play) contains more material than EP (extended play) and yet, for instance, Dream Theater labelled/tagged A Change of Seasons as an EP despite the fact that its runtime of 57:30 is longer than some of their actual studio albums. By comparison, the very Metallica released Beyond Magnetic as and EP and it lasts less then half an hour with similar number of tracks (4 to 5).

And that what is irking me: there should be some criteria, guideline how to classify releases. Right now I see too much mess in this regard. ~2026-39267-21 (talk) 11:39, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

I forgot about the other sources! Both BBC and Antihero claim that Hardwired… To Self-Destruct is Metallica’s 11th studio album, not 10th.

• https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-37129871
• https://www.antiheromagazine.com/metallica-to-release-hardwiredto-self-destruct-november-18th-on-their-own-blackened-recordings/

You may think it is a miscount because they included a collaborative studio album Lulu, but no: both sources state “first studio album since 2008’s multi-platinum Death Magnetic.”

And if you read what the first link shows, then there is a bomber: Metallica themselves count Hardwired… To Self-Destruct as their 11th studio album. Lulu is in completely another, exclusive section (https://www.metallica.com/releases/collaborations/#primary).

So that pretty much clarifies any confusion above since this is their actual statement: “[Hardwired… To Self-Destruct] is our 11th studio album (…).” They also have written that it is “the follow-up to Death Magnetic.”

Just check this out → https://www.metallica.com/news/2016-08-18-hardwired-to-self-destruct-available-november-18-2016.html

So why the 11th studio album, not 10th? Well, it must be because of Garage Inc., since it is not for Lulu, right? Cannot be The $5.98 E.P.: Garage Days Re-Revisited either, because the word “EP” is literally in the title (so not “LP” or “album”). It is also not because of live albums.

Also, if somebody thought it was a one-off miscount mistake, then no: 72 Seasons is counted by themselves as the 12th studio album, not 11th (as Wikipedia states) → https://www.metallica.com/news/2022-11-28-new-album-72-seasons.html

So that pretty much clarifies it all, doesn’t it? Metallica’s studio album discography should be therefore in chronological order from 1983 to 2023:

• 1. Kill ’Em All
• 2. Ride the Lightning
• 3. Master of Puppets
• 4. …And Justice for All
• 5. Metallica
• 6. Load
• 7. Reload
• 8. Garage Inc. (with the 1st disc counted as a studio album while the 2nd disc separately as a compilation (similarly to Pink Floyd’s Ummagumma double album: one live and one studio))
• 9. St. Anger
• 10. Death Magnetic
• 11. Hardwired… To Self-Destruct (confirmed by Metallica themselves that it is indeed their 11th studio album, not 10th)
• 12. 72 Seasons (confirmed by Metallica themselves that it is indeed their 12th studio album, not 11th)

Just for info, one more source: Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives lists Garage Inc. as a “main” release among the remaining 11 studio albums from 1983 Kill ’Em All to 2023 72 Seasons, while Lulu and The $5.98 E.P.: Garage Days Re-Revisited are in “misc.” section → https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Metallica/125

~2026-39126-53 (talk) 12:54, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

• Metallica themselves calling Hardwired their 11th and 72 their 12th is definitely a good sign that Garage should be counted. I was looking for press releases such as that but couldn't find any. I own Benoit Clerc's All the Songs book and he refers to Garage as "their next album" after Reload (p. 290), which I would also guess is a good sign. Metal Archives is actually a blacklisted site on WP so it's unreliable. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 17:05, 11 July 2026 (UTC)
• Joel McIver also calls Garage "the new album" in his book Justice for All: The Truth About Metallica (p. 257). He also includes it in his "albums" section in the back of the book (p. 352), albeit also S&M, Live Shit, and Good Bad and the Live, so idk how reliable that is... – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 17:21, 11 July 2026 (UTC)
• Malcolm Dome in Metallica: The Music and the Mayhem gives a breakdown of Garage like the rest of their main releases (also including live stuff and S&M). He says the album "acted as a fine stop-gap for the band" (p. 110). That's not necessarily a bad thing, as David Bowie recorded his covers album Pin Ups as a stop-gap release, yet that's a studio record. Dome also interestingly includes a quote from Lars Ulrich: "You know, we made three pretty serious albums in a row. It was time to do something different." Given that McIver also talked about how the band promoted it like a new project, I think it's safe to say at this point Garage should be treated as such. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 17:38, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

  My opinion on whether or not Garage, Inc. should be counted as a studio album hinges entirely upon what Metallica views it as. In general—not just for Metallica—I'd count something as a studio album if it either obviously is or if the artist directly calls it such. Considering we have proof where sources and Metallica themselves view it as a studio album, then I think it obviously counts. λ NegativeMP1 23:21, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

  I'm ok with amending the remaining studio album tallies and updating this one to #8. We could cite the press releases for Hardwired and 72 as being their 11th and 12th albums, respectively, on those pages too. Given that the press release for the Reload box set actually calls it their seventh studio album, I'm hoping the next one for Garage Inc. (and possible S&M as rumored) will address its status. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:24, 12 July 2026 (UTC)