Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

9
Letters
Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:00 AM

Pass the mike

Def Jam went from a dorm room to a music empire. Its famous founders are gone -- is the label still good?

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Thursday, October 20, 2005 03:20 AM

some lazy stuff here

Describing Slayer as "an unknown metal band" when in fact, they were and are the archtype thrash metal band, is ignorant and lazy journalism.

Furthermore, it's well known that the Beastie Boys left Def Jam over a huge royalty dispute - which Mr. Hatch-Miller could have discovered with a google search.

Thursday, October 20, 2005 04:43 AM

Beastie Boys dispute

Thanks for your letter Helltrout. We've corrected the article.

Thursday, October 20, 2005 09:03 AM

Criticism from a headbanger

"First, CBS records declined to release Hose's record, and then it decided at the last minute not to release one of Rubin's pet projects, an album called "Reign in Blood" by an unknown metal band called Slayer."

Is this a joke?

Thursday, October 20, 2005 09:11 AM

A bad mistake

I know this was a review of a book about hip-hop, but to describe Slayer as an "unknown metal band" is and egregiously bad error. For the author's information, "Reign in Blood" is considered a masterpiece in metal circles.

Thursday, October 20, 2005 11:32 AM

Slayer

Slayer's "Reign in Blood" was the album that brought the cult metal band to wide notoriety. And according to the author of the book in question, CBS' refusal to release the controversial album was one of the problems that led to Rubin's departure from the CBS-owned label Def Jam Records.

From allmusic.com:

"Due to the graphic nature of the material, CBS refused to distribute the album, which garnered a great deal of publicity for the band; eventually, Geffen Records stepped in."

Thursday, October 20, 2005 02:54 PM

so because all music says so

that's it? that's research? allmusic.com?

While "Reign In Blood" certainly raised Slayer's profile, 1985's "Hell Awaits" is considered a metal classic and was Slayer's 4th album. Slayer was hardly unknown when Rubin signed them the following year.

Thursday, October 20, 2005 05:46 PM

Slayer

Helltrout,

Thank you for so quickly pointing out the problem with my description of Slayer as "unknown" before Reign in Blood. It was a very careless way to decribe them.

Here's what I should have made clear: compared to artists on big corporate record labels, Slayer (and their previous label Metal Blade) were pretty small-time in 1986/87. Rubin made the band famous, but because CBS records wanted to avoid controversy, he almost didn't get a chance to release their album.

Do you disagree with that account? If so, you're not disagreeing with me, but rather with the author of the book I reviewed.

By the way, I find allmusic.com and the published All Music Guides to be mostly reliable and well-edited sources of information on popular music. Do you have a better resouce to suggest?

Friday, October 21, 2005 06:38 AM

Yes I would disagree

Metal Blade was a prominent independent label in 1986. Slayer was their biggest act. They were already playing 1000-2000 seat theaters - the same sized venues they play today. Rubin only tangentially made Slayer more famous - the controversy surrounding the decision and the political climate was the prime factor-- those were the PMRC days. The other factor was that Reign In Blood was a radical musical step towards punk brevity and sharpness and away from traditional metal.

All Music Guide can be a good resource -- but it is hardly perfect.For instance, my band's entry has some biographical information wrong (and AMG ignored my emailed correction). To use it as the only non-primary source is doing yourself and the reader a disservice. Try Lexus-Nexis and google.

As to your other point that I'm disagreeing with your authors, not you. When you parrot their account as fact -- their opinion becomes yours. Their sloppiness / source coddling is pretty telling when they don't address the Bestie Boys claim that they got jacked out of several million dollars in royalties. A claim Mike D made in Grand Royale when he interviewed Russell Simmons some years ago. Certainly, the legal dust settled some time ago -- but gag orders don't change history.

Tuesday, November 8, 2005 02:19 AM

From the author of "Def Jam, Inc." re Slayer

To all the Slayer fans who expressed dismay at Mr. Hatch-Miller's reference to Slayer as an "unknown" metal band at the time of their signing with Def Jam:

This was Mr. Hatch-Miller's own conclusion, not mine. I made it very clear in my book, "Def Jam, Inc." that Slayer were known and respected at the time of their meeting with Rick Rubin -- BEFORE they ever signed with Def Jam. In fact, the real story, the story I tell in my book, is that Rubin was the uknown one at the time of his meeting with Slayer in 1985. They were already superstars in his eyes.

I write on p. 72, "Rubin showed up [at a NYC record store It's Only Rock'n'Roll] in November of 1985 with Adam Yauch, asking the store clerk if he'd heard of an extreme heavy metal group called Slayer and their new album, 'Hell Awaits.' 'I thought their stuff was incredible,' recalled Rubin, who had seen Slayer perform a few months before at the New Music Seminar and owned both of their previous EP's: Live Undead and Haunting the Chapel. Slayer was based in L.A. and signed to a West Coast label called Metal Blade..." And so on.

My book contains lots of stories about Slayer, the making of 'Reign In Blood,' insider info on how the album ended up being dropped by CBS, and much more.

It was very important for me to show that Slayer was an important group prior to their relationship with Def Jam with an ideal set-up to create what became -- I believe -- their landmark album, 'Reign in Blood.'

Stacy Gueraseva

Author, "Def Jam, Inc."

Most Active Letters Threads

426

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
308

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
210

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
111

How dare you criticize wasteful defense spending!

So you think it's only terrorist-appeasing lefties who are down on Pentagon profligacy? Think again
59

Police to talk to Woods

Early morning crash raises questions, and revives tabloid speculation

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon