www.Terrorizer.com - View topic - The Iron Maiden thread
TERRORIZER FRONT PAGE
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Jul 09, 2020 12:12 pm



Reply to topic  [ 2688 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127 ... 135  Next
 The Iron Maiden thread 
Author Message
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 4:33 pm
Posts: 8341
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Vic wrote:
Wait, you went from 1982 to 1992...

The period 1982-1988 is what I regard their absolute best. The others don't even compare.


I have to say, studio wise I agree, but live they were way better in 1984 than 86, and better in 86 than 88 or 92.

_________________
Why was the Christmas thread unlocked and then locked again??? Completely without justification.


Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:27 pm
Profile
Fluffy Bunny Rabbit
Fluffy Bunny Rabbit
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:58 am
Posts: 433
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
That may be, although I thought they sounded fine on Maiden England but CE mentioned 92 and the reunion period as better. I've only seen footage but damn, I think the difference is evident. Not that I have a problem with their performance now, they are miles ahead than many other bands younger than them but in the 80s they were almost untouchable.


Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:31 pm
Profile WWW
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 4:33 pm
Posts: 8341
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Of course, there is always the fact that the Powerslave tour set list was better than any tour after it because there was no crap songs.

_________________
Why was the Christmas thread unlocked and then locked again??? Completely without justification.


Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:45 pm
Profile
Storm Trooper
Storm Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:23 pm
Posts: 21991
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Brave New World suffers from many of the problems that their Blaze era albums did. The difference is that the production is better and so are the songs--although I prefer the atmosphere of X Factor--but I just can't go along with the idea that it's a classic Maiden album. It just doesn't sound as tight musically as their best material. I can buy into the idea that it's a 4 fist album but no more.

It's really hard to believe that it's going to be 16 years old at the end of May. I still have vivid memories of buying an advanced copy of it at a promotional sale at midnight 4 days before its official release. I was at a mate's 21st at the time and I drove into town especially to pick it up and then went back to the party and chucked it on. Most of the attendees complained so it got turned off after 4 songs :lol: Which I guess means it stayed on for half an hour.

Every Maiden album after BNW had its moments. I quite like The Final Frontier, but that is a bit of a controversial album around here.

They certainly haven't made a bad album since they reunited with Smith and Dickinson, but it's hard for me to get really enthusiastic about them. They are just respectable albums, nothing more nothing less.

_________________
Image


Tue Jan 26, 2016 6:31 pm
Profile
Space Ranger
Space Ranger

Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:50 am
Posts: 1097
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Vic wrote:
That may be, although I thought they sounded fine on Maiden England but CE mentioned 92 and the reunion period as better. I've only seen footage but damn, I think the difference is evident. Not that I have a problem with their performance now, they are miles ahead than many other bands younger than them but in the 80s they were almost untouchable.


I'm only going on the footage as well [for the 80s era anyway] but TBH it's blatantly clear that after about 1984/85 Maiden's live standards went downhill. They were still a great band, but some of the Maiden England performances are a bit ropey here and there, and any footage you can find on Youtube of the 1986 tour makes it very clear that Dickinson is only singing at about 60% of his usual performance level.

It's indisputable that when Gers joined the band he gave them a massive kick up the arse live, in much the same way as Dickinson did when he joined in 1982.

The only issue I have with Maiden's live show nowadays is that there are some songs which have been slowed back down to the studio tempos [Fear Of The Dark] and in the 80s and 90s they were playing them much faster, which sounded more exciting. But this is a minor quibble really. Generally Maiden were a far more consistent live act in the 2000s than they were in the 1986-90 era.


Tue Jan 26, 2016 6:53 pm
Profile
Fluffy Bunny Rabbit
Fluffy Bunny Rabbit
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:58 am
Posts: 433
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Sorry, based on what I've seen I'd rather watch inconsistent 86 Bruce than the best 00s Bruce. Seriously.


Tue Jan 26, 2016 7:54 pm
Profile WWW
Star Trooper
Star Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:42 pm
Posts: 4656
Location: Russian Fed.
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Mali wrote:
Okay.... let's put this in a different light. Of the people who rave about modern Maiden, is it a fanboy thing? Or, did you get into Maiden later than people like me, and so you have a different view on Maiden. What I mean is, it's a well established 'fact' that people tend to highly rate the album that got them into Maiden, so if you got into Maiden in 1989/1991 then you would probably rate 'No Prayer / Fear of the Dark' much higher than someone like me who bought Number of the Beast when it was still Maiden's current album.

Of course the other option is that you hand on heart believe that Maiden albums of today are of equal quality to the early classics. I mean, you're obviously in cloud cuckoo land, but... fine.

Honestly the only Maiden album (post 86) that did anything at all for me was 'BNW' and that was probably a lot to do with nostalgia and Bruce coming back. I still think it's the best album they've done since Somewhere in Time, but it's not exactly 'classic'. The other re-union albums have been middling at best, but Final Frontier was just so bloody awful. The intro alone was something I would expect from a much lesser band and the whole thing was so uncompromisingly dull, I honestly couldn't get through it. I turned it off about half way through.


Childhood:

First time I've heard Iron Maiden it's probably around 1997-98 year, after PL :)
As a kid I liked their live on the VHS as the Show (with Eddie and focuses) and can't remember ANY of the positive about their music. I known they are big as Metallica and this is it. My father is Deep Purple, Led Zepp and early Queen fan, so that helps to me.

Since 2011:

Then, they come to Russia with The Final Frontier. I downloaded it, listened to it then deleted.
On TEZ I was encouraged to listen their full discography and I like their first albums especially Somewhere In Time. For modern Maiden it's just Brave New World.

The Book of Souls made me lose the interest in nowadays Maiden completely.
And I would like to agree with Stat_Rad with this:
Stat_Rad wrote:
but it's hard for me to get really enthusiastic about them. They are just respectable albums, nothing more nothing less.

_________________
The Wretch wrote:
Just enjoy his posts as if they were the philosophical ramblings of a turpentine drinking hobo.


Common, give yourself a chance!
https://music.yandex.ru/users/lecter-zador/playlists/3


Wed Jan 27, 2016 12:08 pm
Profile
Storm Trooper
Storm Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:23 pm
Posts: 21991
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Mali wrote:
What I mean is, it's a well established 'fact' that people tend to highly rate the album that got them into Maiden, so if you got into Maiden in 1989/1991 then you would probably rate 'No Prayer / Fear of the Dark' much higher than someone like me who bought Number of the Beast when it was still Maiden's current album.


There is probably a lot of truth to this, but it could equally suggest that there is something that older fans aren't 'getting' about Maiden since 2000. After all, if the albums are 'good enough' to win new fans, there is always the possibility that we are underrating them.

What I do find encouraging though is how the stigma of liking old metal bands, and metal in general really, has been largely removed. That has definitely helped Maiden and Priest remain relevant as they age and become less interesting musically. I know people that listen to Maiden now that had zero interest when I was obsessed with them in the early to mid 90's, and it's not like these guys weren't into metal and hard rock at the time either. Their attitude towards Maiden was that they were just an 80's metal band that they couldn't relate to.

_________________
Image


Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:16 pm
Profile
Space Ranger
Space Ranger

Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:50 am
Posts: 1097
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
^ Yeah, that's a good point. The amount of times that I heard "nah I don't like this old stuff" when I was at uni a decade or more ago was annoying. Now at least it's become much more common to be enthusiastic about older bands and music amongst the younger generations.


Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:52 pm
Profile
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 4:33 pm
Posts: 8341
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Stat_Rad wrote:
Mali wrote:
What I mean is, it's a well established 'fact' that people tend to highly rate the album that got them into Maiden, so if you got into Maiden in 1989/1991 then you would probably rate 'No Prayer / Fear of the Dark' much higher than someone like me who bought Number of the Beast when it was still Maiden's current album.


There is probably a lot of truth to this, but it could equally suggest that there is something that older fans aren't 'getting' about Maiden since 2000. After all, if the albums are 'good enough' to win new fans, there is always the possibility that we are underrating them.

What I do find encouraging though is how the stigma of liking old metal bands, and metal in general really, has been largely removed. That has definitely helped Maiden and Priest remain relevant as they age and become less interesting musically. I know people that listen to Maiden now that had zero interest when I was obsessed with them in the early to mid 90's, and it's not like these guys weren't into metal and hard rock at the time either. Their attitude towards Maiden was that they were just an 80's metal band that they couldn't relate to.


I think my problem with Maiden is that in the old days they wrote albums which were more varied, this isn't just a problem with Maiden incidentally, a lot of bands are too narrow these days. Since Bruce rejoined they've barely written either a Trooper style stomper or an Icarus style single. Everything is 6 minutes plus and starts slowly with a bass.... okay, maybe a slight generalization. I like the epics, but I don't want 'Revalations' nine times on an album.

And the other thing is that in every area, production, vocals, songwriting etc... Maiden are just inferior to what they used to be.

_________________
Why was the Christmas thread unlocked and then locked again??? Completely without justification.


Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:01 pm
Profile
Star Trooper
Star Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:13 pm
Posts: 2575
Location: Essex
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Mali wrote:
Stat_Rad wrote:
Mali wrote:
What I mean is, it's a well established 'fact' that people tend to highly rate the album that got them into Maiden, so if you got into Maiden in 1989/1991 then you would probably rate 'No Prayer / Fear of the Dark' much higher than someone like me who bought Number of the Beast when it was still Maiden's current album.


There is probably a lot of truth to this, but it could equally suggest that there is something that older fans aren't 'getting' about Maiden since 2000. After all, if the albums are 'good enough' to win new fans, there is always the possibility that we are underrating them.

What I do find encouraging though is how the stigma of liking old metal bands, and metal in general really, has been largely removed. That has definitely helped Maiden and Priest remain relevant as they age and become less interesting musically. I know people that listen to Maiden now that had zero interest when I was obsessed with them in the early to mid 90's, and it's not like these guys weren't into metal and hard rock at the time either. Their attitude towards Maiden was that they were just an 80's metal band that they couldn't relate to.


I think my problem with Maiden is that in the old days they wrote albums which were more varied, this isn't just a problem with Maiden incidentally, a lot of bands are too narrow these days. Since Bruce rejoined they've barely written either a Trooper style stomper or an Icarus style single. Everything is 6 minutes plus and starts slowly with a bass.... okay, maybe a slight generalization. I like the epics, but I don't want 'Revalations' nine times on an album.

And the other thing is that in every area, production, vocals, songwriting etc... Maiden are just inferior to what they used to be.

Mali this may be the best post you've ever written. As much as I like BoS the quiet start/reprise at the end thing is fucking annoying.
Now go back to normal and post shit I disagree with ;)

_________________
Memorare debut album 'Philistine' out now http://blackwoodproductions.bigcartel.c ... igipack-cd
Image


Wed Jan 27, 2016 7:44 pm
Profile WWW
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 4:33 pm
Posts: 8341
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
major-general heavy wrote:
Mali wrote:
I think my problem with Maiden is that in the old days they wrote albums which were more varied, this isn't just a problem with Maiden incidentally, a lot of bands are too narrow these days. Since Bruce rejoined they've barely written either a Trooper style stomper or an Icarus style single. Everything is 6 minutes plus and starts slowly with a bass.... okay, maybe a slight generalization. I like the epics, but I don't want 'Revalations' nine times on an album.

And the other thing is that in every area, production, vocals, songwriting etc... Maiden are just inferior to what they used to be.

Mali this may be the best post you've ever written. As much as I like BoS the quiet start/reprise at the end thing is fucking annoying.
Now go back to normal and post shit I disagree with ;)


Cheers, I'll do my best! :lol:

_________________
Why was the Christmas thread unlocked and then locked again??? Completely without justification.


Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:01 pm
Profile
Space Ranger
Space Ranger
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 3:54 am
Posts: 1061
Location: Melbourne
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Errr.....yeah.....

Naaaaah, still don't like 'em.


:|

_________________
Tool are lying about their new album. There IS no new album.


Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:31 pm
Profile
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 4:07 am
Posts: 5919
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Mali wrote:
Okay.... let's put this in a different light. Of the people who rave about modern Maiden, is it a fanboy thing? Or, did you get into Maiden later than people like me, and so you have a different view on Maiden. What I mean is, it's a well established 'fact' that people tend to highly rate the album that got them into Maiden, so if you got into Maiden in 1989/1991 then you would probably rate 'No Prayer / Fear of the Dark' much higher than someone like me who bought Number of the Beast when it was still Maiden's current album.

Of course the other option is that you hand on heart believe that Maiden albums of today are of equal quality to the early classics. I mean, you're obviously in cloud cuckoo land, but... fine.


FOTD was my first Maiden and my first Metal album in 1992, prior to that I'd bought Use Your Illusion I and possibly Nevermind, I briefly played it a lot until getting the Black Album a few months later. Despite it being my "gateway" album I have only ever listened to Be Quick and the title track in years, of all the Maiden albums I've heard I'd rate it below everything bar No Prayer, TFF and the last one. I've not heard all 80s Maiden but I'd consider well below everything I'm familiar with and I'm no fanboy, I like Maiden rather than love them.


Fri Jan 29, 2016 10:36 am
Profile
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:58 am
Posts: 5626
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Fucking Maiden. For fuck's sake.

_________________
Image


Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:42 pm
Profile
Storm Trooper
Storm Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:23 pm
Posts: 21991
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Cosmic Equilibrium wrote:
^ Yeah, that's a good point. The amount of times that I heard "nah I don't like this old stuff" when I was at uni a decade or more ago was annoying. Now at least it's become much more common to be enthusiastic about older bands and music amongst the younger generations.


In the 90's it was totally uncool to be into Maiden, especially by the mid 90's, but a major reason for that is that the difference between the 80's and 90's in terms of fashion and music was huge and far greater than the difference between 2006 and 2016. When I listen to albums that are 10 years old, they don't sound that old to me, and the dated elements are more 'subtle', but 1986 music sounded like it was coming from another dimension in 1996.


MALI: You are correct about the sameyness of modern Maiden. It's a point that isn't really brought up much. Fans often complain about the similarity of the intros etc, but not about the actual songs themselves.

_________________
Image


Sun Jan 31, 2016 5:42 pm
Profile
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 4:33 pm
Posts: 8341
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Stat_Rad wrote:
Cosmic Equilibrium wrote:
^ Yeah, that's a good point. The amount of times that I heard "nah I don't like this old stuff" when I was at uni a decade or more ago was annoying. Now at least it's become much more common to be enthusiastic about older bands and music amongst the younger generations.


In the 90's it was totally uncool to be into Maiden, especially by the mid 90's, but a major reason for that is that the difference between the 80's and 90's in terms of fashion and music was huge and far greater than the difference between 2006 and 2016. When I listen to albums that are 10 years old, they don't sound that old to me, and the dated elements are more 'subtle', but 1986 music sounded like it was coming from another dimension in 1996.


MALI: You are correct about the sameyness of modern Maiden. It's a point that isn't really brought up much. Fans often complain about the similarity of the intros etc, but not about the actual songs themselves.


This is absolutely true Stat Rad, the differences between 1986 and 1996 are HUGE. Musicianship was coming on at such a rate for a start, drumming that was acceptable in 86 could be laughably poor by 1996. And production, or rather 'sound' choices was another area that 'improvements' (possibly) were made. On the other hand, Metal entered into the homologation period which results in every guitar player in the world now having essentially the same gear/sound. Give me the 80s for sound any day, Tom Warrior's shitty Ibanez that wouldn't stay in tune - at least it had it's own sound!

_________________
Why was the Christmas thread unlocked and then locked again??? Completely without justification.


Sun Jan 31, 2016 5:57 pm
Profile
Star Trooper
Star Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:49 pm
Posts: 4310
Location: Australia.
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Stat_Rad wrote:
In the 90's it was totally uncool to be into Maiden, especially by the mid 90's


This was certainly my experience - you'd cop a few raised eyebrows and smirks for saying that you listened to something that was considered so archaic and of a bygone era.

_________________
Image


Mon Feb 01, 2016 12:35 am
Profile
Super Trooper
Super Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:58 am
Posts: 5626
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread

_________________
Image


Fri May 13, 2016 11:55 am
Profile
Star Trooper
Star Trooper
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2014 10:25 am
Posts: 3474
Location: Australia
Post Re: The Iron Maiden thread
Wow... that is no where near as good as the Sydney show was.

_________________
Image

"Grishknackh was a man of contradiction... filled with dishonour. Once he said himself to be an elf, I look upon him as a cowardly squealing orc!"
- Mortiis, 1995
Cosmic Equilibrium wrote:
In all honesty I rate Killers below Virtual XI.


Sat May 14, 2016 3:15 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 2688 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127 ... 135  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.