Top 5 Sab Albums

[RLP4ever]

I think these are ALL Black Sabbath albums. Certainly, anything that Iommi is on is a Black Sabbath album. More generally, anything from Ozzy, Geezer, and Ward is also Black Sabbath, because, as founders of the genre, they are making music. The only quirk is that they're not making it together.

Rich, the mind literally boggles reading your declarations here ..Can you seriously, and while sober, believe and justify what you just said here? We have here ALL Black Sabbath albums? Iommi on 'anything' is Black Sabbath??.. And try telling average Sabbath fans anywhere that Ozzy's 'solo' albums (good, bad or awful), Geezer's absolutely atrocious solo efforts and whatever inconsequential solo- Ward there is, are ALL Black Sabbath, but for a "quirk" of not doing it "together" as a band? And founders of the genre?? I reckon you might have meant the 'original', 'founding' foursome of one of the iconic, pioneering legends of the genre. At any rate, if you insist on adopting everything each of the original four members of Black Sabbath have ever done on their own, in their solo careers, to be somehow representative of the band itself, and find that a comforting thought, fine, suit yourself. I just find it nothing short of staggeringly silly. At least you didn't sully Sabbath's good name with the blatantly sucky solo careers of those other ex-members of Black Sabbath, a la Dio and Tony Martin.

Solo work from the original four Sabbath members counts as Sabbath, the same way that scripture from prophets and disciples counts as holy scripture.

Notwithstanding the explicit 'ban' on 'religious' exchanges on this board, I gotta say Rich, personal opinions on this specific issue aside, you blew a gaping, giant hole in your argument by invoking an analogy of "prophets and disciples" and "holy scripture", I've never been one to worship at the altar of false god(s), let alone invoke 'prophets' and 'scripture', of all things, to burnish my points of view on an issue. Need I say that let's not even get into what, if anything, is "holy" and what really is "profane" in matters musical, or indeed life, generally?

[Rich]

Drawing a logical prallel to is hardly a religious exchange, but I didn't mean to offend your senses either way. I think the comparison is perfectly logical and relevant. I never professed to be religious, nor make any claim to what I think is holy and what isn't.

Take a step back for a moment. As a member of our society, it's difficult to escape the knowledge that the bible, which some consider holy,consists of what is considered 'G-d's word', prophetic accounts, and writings of disciples. Whether or not you believe it to be true or holy, the whole shtick of Judeo-Christian society is that it is, indeed holy.

Just take that construction objectively. It's then clear the parallel I'm making here: Black Sabbath is the original, from-G-d holy scripture, and the solo work of the original four members is like them disseminating the awesome account of metal to the rest of the world, just like the prophets and disciples. I'm basing my argument on 5,000+ years of monotheistic history. If you want to disagree with me on objective grounds, that's fine, but don't go telling me that you disagree with me because you don't believe in religion. My comments have nothing to do with anyone's personal beliefs.

It's just a parallel construction, not a religious war. Don't get so best out of shape over it.

[RLP4ever]

Rich, nobody is getting bent out of shape here, so what's this needless nonsense you're on about?.. There's scarcely anything "objective" in abruptly drawing "religious" Biblical 'holy' parallels of 'prophets' and 'scripture' and the Sabbath situation we were discussing. Religious beliefs or the lack of them, of yours and mine, is wholly irrelevant here. And my previous comments, regardless of my personal opinions on God and religion, were hardly some anti-religion, anti-God tirade against religious, God-fearing, church-going, Christian folks. So yeah, this isn't a 'religious war'. For those sorts of debates (not war), I have other arenas to wage them in.

Ok now, very objectively, I flat-out disagree with your analogy here, based not on some "5,000+ years of monotheistic history" but rather on downright 'secular' knowledge and common sense about Black Sabbath's history. Like I said, it seems exceedingly, incredulously eccentric, to put it as mildly as I can, to argue as you do, that everything the 'original' Sabbath members have done 'solo' basically, in whatever warped ways, still qualify as Black Sabbath. Your likening Black Sabbath, the band, to some 'divine' 'original' 'holy scripture' (of METAL) and the members, like pilgrims trekking on down the years, proselytizing their gems of 'metal' wisdom to the rest of the musical community, is the sort of hallucinatory mumbo-jumbo that defies logic, truth and yes, genuine 'objectivity'.

I'd argue that 'original' Black Sabbath, while undoubtedly a massive source of inspiration and imitation for many latter-day metal musicians, cannot be deemed some supreme, God-like authority of metal musicianship and everybody else merely being their lesser, mortal 'disciples'. There's plenty in the Black Sabbath canon to make believers and potential converts renounce their 'faith', if you get the drift. And, maybe you aren't fully aware of how the original members' solo careers and output, very far from being some style guide to modern metal musicians, aren't even exactly revered, but rather 'reviled' by tons of Black Sabbath fans, around the world. Besides, I don't know if you care to fully recognise to admit that how in such a deep and diverse world of metal music, there have been other ground-breaking, genre-defining metal artistes that have not necessarily emulated some Sabbath Bible for their art, but have been distinct 'gods', in their own right, in a veritable pantheon of metal gods. So, that's it really, I honestly and strongly disagree with your overt, and in my view, specious religious analogy on this issue for the simple reasons I have stated above.

[Rich]

You are really taking this too seriously. If I knew you (or anyone) was going to dissect my words and try to take them out of context like this, I would not have written them. It's the sort of thing that probably goes on inside of the Religion/Politics forums, and I want no part of that. What I made was a casual comment on a music forum, and what I got from you was an extreme reaction as though were were in fifth grade and I'd just insulted your mother. Your strong language that condescendingly attacks me and my opinions belies the fact that you've taken this far more seriously than it should be taken.

If you didn't take this so seriously, you'd be able to see the point I'm trying to make. I'm not sure that you do because your posts are very aggresive, so I genuinely think you're being distracted by something else and not focusing properly on what I'm trying to say.

[RLP4ever]

No Rich, trust me, you clearly misunderstand and exaggerate when saying that I took your 'casual' remarks in your original post 'too seriously'..I honestly did not. And my long, admittedly opinionated responses to your two posts were not so much stridently 'aggressive' attacks on your opinions, or you personally, for saying the things you did, as they were reasoned rebuttals on an honest, distinct disagreement on the issue, that's all.

I had explicitly stated how I considered 'God/religion/scripture' or our personal beliefs on the matters, to be wholly irrelevant here. And I reckon I had amply demonstrated as much by mainly and coherently talking of how and why I found the specific analogy you used here to be weirdly inappropriate, and frankly, way wide off the mark. I had explained that via the counterpoints I had made in my post.

I did not take your comments "out of context". It's unfortunate that you felt that way, and sadder and sillier still, how you liken my reaction to a fifth grader irate about having his mum insulted. You wouldn't know how I'd react to that sort of incident anyway.

If anything, you were the one that clearly got all unnecessarily defensive and antsy in the way you reacted to my first post, in your last post. You're the one that launched into some pretty high-minded, scholarly philosophizing on the issue when I had done nothing of the sort, initially. So no, you're clearly wrong to complain about some fictitious Religion/Politics forum situation here and claiming to want "no part of that". Heck, I don't either. And this is definitely not even the place for those sorts of acrimonious duels, as I had all too abundantly pointed out earlier on. So, if anybody appears 'distracted' and not paying proper attention to all that's being said between the two of us, is you Rich. I assure you that I totally understand and appreciate what you were saying in both your previous posts. I just happen to totally disagree. And I chose to elaborate that through my rebuttals, that's all. I hope we're completely cool about this.

Btw, I still can't figure out your choice of amputating and hyphenating poor 'God' as 'G-d'

[Rich]

I tried to go back and find quotes to highlight what I meant from your posts, but quite frankly, I'd be quoting everything. Your tone is very offensive and hostile; even in your last post, there's a certain tone of condescention that I don't like. Anyway, I think we've beaten this horse to death already.

Getting back to the main point:

The fact remains that if I am going to consider all 17 studio albums as Sabbath albums, or even anything past the original eight albums for that matter, then solo work counts as Sabbath as well. Once Ozzy left, the sound of the band changed, and it kept chaning as people came and went. Even if you don't consider Seventh Star to be Sabbath (as some here don't), the Tony Martin albums only had a single original Sabbath member in them: Tony Iommi.

Martin-era albums had only Tony Iommi, yet we consider it a Sabbath album. Why? The only member from the original band is Iommi. It's as much an Iommi solo album as anything. If I can consider a band with only one original Black Sabbath member in it to be true Black Sabbath, well, then... any band that has at least one Black Sabbath member is Black Sabbath, regardless of what superficial name is given to it.

Ozzy's material may not all sound like Sabbath and neither may Geezer's, but if you listen to songs from the original eight studio albums, there's a wide range of musical styles, from The Wizard, to War Pigs, to Under the Sun, to Am I Going Insane, to It's All Right, to Swinging the Chain. We can accept that such a wide variety of influences played upon Sabbath music, so surely just because something sounds different doesn't mean it's not Sabbath.

If we consider the Martin-era to be Black Sabbath, then we must consider any band with at least one Sabbath member in it to also be Sabbath. Since I am of the opinion that all of the 17 studio albums are true Black Sabbath albums, I must also conclude that the solo work of each artist is in some way a creative arm of the original band. Obviously, I don't mean this in a literal sense, but it's part of the Sabbath experience.

The only way out of this logic is to say that although Iommi was the only member in the band, he is so important for the Sabbath sound that his playing carries the Sabbath sound alone, and therefore, even in the absence of the other original players, the songs still sound like Sabbath. OTOH, Geezer, Bill, and Ozzy are more inconsequential to Sabbath's sound, so their solo playing doesn't carry the proper Sabbath tone. I could go for that, but it would limit my view of what Sabbath is and unfairly bias me when it comes to certain 'Sabbath' material. I like Joe's view that all of the 17 albums are great Sabbath albums, not just the original eight, so while I'm at it, I like to include a bit more material. Yes, I have a hard time thinking of Ohmwork as a Black Sabbath record, but just on listening, I have about as much trouble doing that with Seventh Star, Cross Purposes, or Forbidden. Forget the superficial names of the two bands for a second, though, and consider the musical styles and number of original Sabbath members on each album.

[Rover]

The only way out of this logic is to say that although Iommi was the only member in the band, he is so important for the Sabbath sound that his playing carries the Sabbath sound alone, and therefore, even in the absence of the other original players, the songs still sound like Sabbath. OTOH, Geezer, Bill, and Ozzy are more inconsequential to Sabbath's sound, so their solo playing doesn't carry the proper Sabbath tone.

Had I decided to join this discussion, I would have gone straight for this argument.

I like Joe's view that all of the 17 albums are great Sabbath albums, not just the original eight...

That'd be 18.
The rest, well, is debatable.

[RLP4ever]

I tried to go back and find quotes to highlight what I meant from your posts, but quite frankly, I'd be quoting everything. Your tone is very offensive and hostile; even in your last post, there's a certain tone of condescention that I don't like. Anyway, I think we've beaten this horse to death already.

'offensive' and 'hostile'??..You're definitely being way too thin-skinned, touchy, over-sensitive on this, Rich, if you seriously still insist on feeling that way about my 'tone'... Rest assured, I meant no offence or malice toward you. And I sure wasn't 'condescending' you in any way, throughout my responses to you, on this topic.

Getting back to the main point:

The fact remains that if I am going to consider all 17 studio albums as Sabbath albums, or even anything past the original eight albums for that matter, then solo work counts as Sabbath as well. Once Ozzy left, the sound of the band changed, and it kept chaning as people came and went. Even if you don't consider Seventh Star to be Sabbath (as some here don't), the Tony Martin albums only had a single original Sabbath member in them: Tony Iommi.

Martin-era albums had only Tony Iommi, yet we consider it a Sabbath album. Why? The only member from the original band is Iommi. It's as much an Iommi solo album as anything. If I can consider a band with only one original Black Sabbath member in it to be true Black Sabbath, well, then... any band that has at least one Black Sabbath member is Black Sabbath, regardless of what superficial name is given to it.

Ozzy's material may not all sound like Sabbath and neither may Geezer's, but if you listen to songs from the original eight studio albums, there's a wide range of musical styles, from The Wizard, to War Pigs, to Under the Sun, to Am I Going Insane, to It's All Right, to Swinging the Chain. We can accept that such a wide variety of influences played upon Sabbath music, so surely just because something sounds different doesn't mean it's not Sabbath.

If we consider the Martin-era to be Black Sabbath, then we must consider any band with at least one Sabbath member in it to also be Sabbath. Since I am of the opinion that all of the 17 studio albums are true Black Sabbath albums, I must also conclude that the solo work of each artist is in some way a creative arm of the original band. Obviously, I don't mean this in a literal sense, but it's part of the Sabbath experience.

The only way out of this logic is to say that although Iommi was the only member in the band, he is so important for the Sabbath sound that his playing carries the Sabbath sound alone, and therefore, even in the absence of the other original players, the songs still sound like Sabbath. OTOH, Geezer, Bill, and Ozzy are more inconsequential to Sabbath's sound, so their solo playing doesn't carry the proper Sabbath tone. I could go for that, but it would limit my view of what Sabbath is and unfairly bias me when it comes to certain 'Sabbath' material.........so while I'm at it, I like to include a bit more material. Yes, I have a hard time thinking of Ohmwork as a Black Sabbath record, but just on listening, I have about as much trouble doing that with Seventh Star, Cross Purposes, or Forbidden. Forget the superficial names of the two bands for a second, though, and consider the musical styles and number of original Sabbath members on each album.

Well, like I said earlier on, your highly loose and liberal interpretation and definition of what constitutes Black Sabbath output through the decades, probably permits you to happily regard even 'solo' material by each of the ex-members of Sabbath to be somehow representative of Black Sabbath. I recognise your line of thinking though I vehemently disagree with its thrust because I find the 'logic' you're advancing rather flimsy and unconvincing. The wide 'variety' in musical styles across Sabbath eras and particular albums, down to specific songs, (that you cite) isn't really in dispute here nor is it particularly even relevant to this debate. I'd argue it sure doesn't make a song like Ozzy's 'Crazy Train', to give one random example, whatever its similarities or not, to any Ozzy-era Sabbath song, justifiably eligible to be regarded, much less called, a Sabbath song, or Blizzard of Ozz, some quasi-Sabbath album, nevertheless.

You do make an interesting, compelling point, though, about ONLY one original member, i.e. mainman Tony Iommi carrying on with other all-new recruits and recording and releasing successive 'Black Sabbath' albums---in the Tony Martin-era. Ok, I don't know, what was the real deal then? Iommi supposedly had sole 'ownership' of the Black Sabbath name?? At any rate, the overwhelming, universal fan 'consensus' has always mainly been that Iommi's and ONLY his presence alone implies, implicity or explicitly, that the band essentially remains Black Sabbath, whether it's called that or not. Hence, the slightly baffling but very academic scenario with the current Heaven and Hell moniker of a band that is a replica of the line-up that released that namesake album of 1980 as a resurrected, post-Ozzy Black Sabbath.

Gosh, Rich, lemme confess to you that my lowly regard for the TM-era material makes me privately, vainly foreswear those years and the albums they yielded, as NOT Black Sabbath to my own eyes and heart. But it remains legally and historically very much Black Sabbath. Heck, talking of that, I'd shock you by retelling something that I've said here on this forum more than a year ago: Iommi might have more properly decided to call his 1980 merger with Dio/Appice the Heaven and Hell band and the album their s-t debut. , instead of doing it NOW. If the band name had to go, I reckon it honestly had to go THEN.

I had already stated my exact reasons for not considering something like Seventh Star as an authentic Black Sabbath album, despite the official, marketing ploy of tacking the Sabbath name on to the album title for blatant commercial and musical viability, at the time of that album's release. For the sake of good taste and sanity , I won't even dignify Geezer's *insert expletive* studio efforts with even the slightest association with Black Sabbath.

I like Joe's view that all of the 17 albums are great Sabbath albums, not just the original eight

Alas, buddy, that's merely Joe's view and apparently yours. ..and I mean that in the quote's entirety...i.e. even the 'original eight' aren't ALL 'great'. To me, there are 6 'phenomenally' great Sabbath albums, 3 moderately good ones, the rest are downright dismal debacles.

[Rich]

"There's only one Black Sabbath... I like to call him Tony Iommi" - racer

It seems more people than not agree with that quote. In a sense, it's a shame that the current band is not called Black Sabbath, but if it lets it play more Dio material, all the better.

Iommi's playing does characterize the Sabbath sound to me, so all incarnations of the band sound familiar enough to be part of the same canon. It's still all different, though. Tough decision.


It would have been very interesting if the 1980 rejuvination of the band was called Heaven and Hell. If that was so, what would Born Again have been called? Seventh Star probably would have been a stright up Iommi solo album, Eternal Idol might have been the same, and the Martin-era cand might have been called Headless Cross.

That'd give us a whole bunch of different bands, all playing off the evil setup by Black Sabbath... perhaps.

[Rover]

I like the band's way with the name, EXCEPT the current Heaven and Hell renaming. It helped the band garner the attention it deserved with each album (except some turkeys like TE, NSD, BA, Forbidden). But I understand why this new name was used: to prevent backlash from the Osbournes and to prevent the fans from firmly associating the new lineup with the old self-tribute nostalgic act that Sabbath has become since '98. It was a no-win situation, something had to be lost.

[danzig2020]

thanks mommy

[Rich]

I don't think it has anything to do with $hozzy at all. I think Iommi is sick and tired of having to play the same classic Sabbath songs over and over again, and would like to flex his creative muscle with other material. If the band is Black Sabbath (which he and everyone else says it really is), then he has to play Black Sabbath songs, which would tie him down to the same songs he's been playing for 40 years. On most of the Martin-era bootlegs, the setlist has the hits from the Ozzy and Dio eras crammed into it, and that means there are only two or three slots to play Martin-era songs. That's incredibly limiting. By calling the band Heaven and Hell, Iommi gets to play songs that otherwise would never get the exposure they deserve.

We've heard Ozzy-era Sabbath nonstop for a decade, so no one's going to miss it too much. Iommi is being as responsible to his music as he is to his fans by deciding to play only Dio-era tunes.

[RLP4ever]

We've heard Ozzy-era Sabbath nonstop for a decade, so no one's going to miss it too much. Iommi is being as responsible to his music as he is to his fans by deciding to play only Dio-era tunes.

Well, I just think that Iommi being "responsible" to his "music" and his "fans" alike is a pretty odd, moot, irrelevant point here, really. I mean, like I pointed out before, this is still really Black Sabbath no matter what (Heaven & Hell or any other) Iommi chooses, out of personal and practical considerations, to call it today (something he arguably should have done-- but had not, in 1980).

If calling it Heaven & Hell somehow finally 'liberates' Iommi from the musical straitjacket of having to anymore play Ozzy-era songs in some 'self-tribute', 'nostalgic' mode (Rover's depiction of the band), then so be it. Gladly so, and I mean it. It would certainly spare me the ordeal of having to hear a declining, disgruntled Dio serving up his customarily egotistical and exasparatingly mangled versions of the classic Ozzy-era tunes. Dio not reluctantly, grudgingly venturing anywhere near Ozzy's (Sabbath) songs anymore and variously wrecking them along the way, would be no small consolation. So, I'd welcome Heaven & Hell sticking solely to Dio-era songs, to satisfy ageing egos and many jaded fans out there. Heck, next time they could even call their touring act Black Sabbath featuring Dio & Appice and play lots of Dio-solo tunes too.

[Mindfold]

I think this was the original topic:

TOP 5 Sabbath albums:

1. Black Sabbath
2. Cross Purposes
3. Heaven and Hell
4. Masters of Reality
5. Sabotage

[Tracette]

Never Say Die- first and foremost, unbelievable

can't list an order for the rest....

Sabbath Bloody Sabbath

Vol 4

Technical Ecstacy

Master of Reality

But Mob Rules is way up there,Im just totally fond of the Ozzy era!

[Tracette]

oh, and Sabotage....

Cannot list 5

[Perfect1]

1. Dehumanizer (first sab record i listened to, and loved it to death)
2. Tyr (beautiful connecting the battle of tyr, odins court and valhalla)
3. Eternal Idol (first five songs, counting 'the shining' which is among my fav sab songs)
4. Born Again (i love gillans screaming and the raw sound)
5. Sabotage (favorite ozzy-era overall album)

[dartholy]

1) Heaven and Hell
2) Black Sabbath
3) Mob Rules
4) Paranoid
5) Born Again

[detuned]

Only picking 5 is pretty much impossible, but off the top of my head.

1. Black Sabbath - the first Sabbath album I ever heard and will always be my favorite.

2. Sabbath Bloody Sabbath - the creative peak of the Ozzy era, perfect balance of their classic sound with more progressive rock influences mixed in.

3. Heaven And Hell - A perfect album, also contains my favorite Tony Iommi guitar performance (Lonely Is The Word)

4. Born Again - My other favorite band of all-time is Deep Purple, so to me this was a match made in heaven (hell). Say whatever you want about the production, etc...it's a classic Sabbath album.

5. Never Say Die/The Eternal Idol (tie) - two albums that were almost completely misunderstood when they were released (probably still are), but in the end VERY interesting albums that stretched their songwriting beyond the normal realm they operate in. Favorite tracks from these are Air Dance (Never Say Die - an absolutely beautiful song) and Born To Lose (The Eternal Idol) - one of the catchiest songs Iommi ever wrote, they should have released this as the single.

*note* - there isn't a single Black Sabbath album that I don't like, even Forbidden and Technical Ecstacy have great songs on them...and Seventh Star almost made this list.

[dio22]

1.H&H
2.Mob rules
3. Dehumanizer
4.born again
5. cross purposes

[Wicked Cricket]

Tough to name top 5, but in terms of the leagacy of the band, I'd say:

1. Paranoid
2. Master Of Reality
3. Sabbath Bloody Sabbath
4. Heaven and Hell
5. either... Vol.4, or Black Sabbath, the first 5 Sab albums are like the Heavy Metal Bible.

Honorable mention:

Sabotage
Mob Rules

[WarningRules]

thanks mommy

Are you capable of saying anything that doesn't piss someone off?

[RLP4ever]

thanks mommy

Ok, then 'Run to Mommy!'

[Rover]

Fuck no, that's not my baby. :D

[MichaelWayne]

Paranoid
TYR
Headless Cross
Born Again
Seventh Star

[DiosSword]

1. Heaven and Hell (a true Desert Island Disc)
2. Born Again
3. Mob Rules
4. Sabotage
5. TYR

[Sabbath69-78]

1. Never Say Die
2. Sabatoge
3. Paranoid
4. Heaven and Hell
5. Born Again

[WarningRules]

1. Never Say Die
2. Sabatoge
3. Paranoid

Hah, our top three are the same.

[Sabbath69-78]

Hah, our top three are the same.

Ha awesome! ROCK ON BRO! lolz

[-E5150 StarWanderer-]

Hard task. Few albums have to settle for a tie

1) Mob Rules - full of classics and fan favorites and doesn't have a single weak track on it
2) Heaven & Hell - loses to Mob Rules just by and inch
3) Dehumanizer/Sabbath Bloody Sabbath
4) TDYK/Master Of Reality
5) Black Sabbath

[Totentanz]

1) Mob Rules

=2) Sabotage, Vol4, Heaven & Hell, Black Sabbath, SBS

[IommiRules]

#1) Sabotage
#2) Sabbath Bloody Sabbath
#3) The Devil You Know- (it's Sabbath)
#4) Dehumanizer
#5) Cross Purposes

[thesithempire]

I think these are ALL Black Sabbath albums. Certainly, anything that Iommi is on is a Black Sabbath album. More generally, anything from Ozzy, Geezer, and Ward is also Black Sabbath, because, as founders of the genre, they are making music. The only quirk is that they're not making it together.

Solo work from the original four Sabbath members counts as Sabbath, the same way that scripture from prophets and disciples counts as holy scripture.

That's a unique perspective! I like its egalitarian spirit, which is far more suitable to my ears than the Iommi=Sabbath POV, or even my own "purist" POV (that none of it's Sabbath unless all four are in the band together.)

Anyway, back on topic:

1. Never Say Die: Elegiac, cosmic and emotionally powerful.
2. Sabbath Bloody Sabbath: Diverse and hypnotic with a proggy sumptuousness.
3. Technical Ecstasy: Experimental, seductive and wildly idiosyncratic.
4. Sabotage: Herculean, cathartic and labyrinthine.
5. Black Sabbath: Gothic, dreamlike and wondrously weird.

[SabbathKing93]

Black Sabbath
Volume 4
Sabbath Bloody Sabbath
Never Say Die
Heaven and Hell

...Hard choice...

[itsthatbradguy]

Dehumanizer
Sabotage
Heaven and Hell
Paranoid
Born Again

[Gurnemanz]

1) (tie) Master of Reality, Black Sabbath, and Heaven and Hell..it's impossible for me to choose just one number one.
2) Live Evil
3) Mob Rules
4) Sabotage
5) Sabbath Bloody Sabbath

[DISCMAN1969]

1) Heaven And Hell
2) Never Say Die
3) The Mob Rules
4) Vol. 4
5) Sabbath Bloody Sabbath


At least thats the order for today. Could change tomorrow

[protometal]

Paranoid
Sabbath Bloody Sabbath
Heaven and Hell
Volume 4
Mob Rules

[Axeman77]

1. Heaven and Hell
2. Sabotage
3. ????Don't Know
4. Headless Cross
5. Mob Rules

That was very hard to do!

---------- Post added at 12:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:30 AM ----------

1) Heaven And Hell
2) Never Say Die
3) The Mob Rules
4) Vol. 4
5) Sabbath Bloody Sabbath


At least thats the order for today. Could change tomorrow

I agree, mine could change tomorrow, but Heaven and Hell is always my favourite

[BSParanoid]

1. Paranoid- Absolute masterpiece top to bottom, IMO. Has my favorite song of all time (War Pigs).
2. Black Sabbath- Another masterpiece, but not as good as Paranoid. Although it does have my 2nd favorite song (NIB).
3. Master of Reality- Children of the Grave, After Forever, Sweet Leaf, and Into the Void. 'Nuff said.
4. Heaven and Hell- Even though I am more of an Ozzy era fan, H&H is yet another masterpiece. It has a whole different vibe than NSD and TE, and is much better.
5. Sabotage- For the longest time, I despised this album. I gave it a fair chance recently, it's definitely an amazing album and I can see why it gets so much praise around here.

Honorable Mentions go to Volume 4 and Mob Rules.