Well ya know I don't really think thats the case with Maiden,I mean look at Priest after Turbo the same year as Somewhere In Time 1986...they at least had Ram It Down which was better than 1990's No Prayer album,and of course we have Painkiller 1990 same year as No Prayer...even Jugulator was better than ANYTHING Maiden did in the 1990's. And of course Angel Of Retribution totally smokes anything Maiden has done since Powerslave,thats for sure.
Look at Saxon...thier first 5 studio albums (1979 - 1983) were good (not as good as 80's Maiden though) then from 1984 to 1992 they wrote 6 shit albums in a row. But they snapped out of it starting in 1995 with Dogs Of War and changed thier image to a normal rock/heavy metal band like they should be instead of thier silly 1980's image and the song writting from that album....up to now 2011 Call To Arms the last 8 studio albums Saxon has written has been the best material they have ever done in my opinion(and many others too).
Why can't Maiden do this? Priest and Saxon at least recovered from thier shitty albums but Maiden keeps writting these boring lame dull albums.Brave New World to me is only half good just like Point Of Entry,sure half of it is cool but the other half sucks balls. Dance Of Death I hate the entire album,AMOLAD I do like minus the two shit singles & videos and The Final Frontier is all SHIT.
Steve Harris is the reason Maiden sucks,he is also the reason the old Maiden albums(1980 - 1984) is so good. He just forgot how to write killer albums. Maiden should of returned Eddie back to the streets like he was in Killers,and numberous drawings ect...and harken thier sound back to Piece Of Mind/Number Of The Beast....
Thats what formula they should of gone with because I think it would of sparked the quality of the song writting. This progressive shit like The Final Frontier is so much further progressed than A Matter Of Life And Death its not even funny,its like a "folk/rock album" not a british heavy metal album. Saxon just stays within thier bounderies and uses the same formula and thier fans love them for it.
[Show/Hide Quoted Message] (Quoting Message by Rik_ from Friday, April 22, 2011 6:33:56 AM)
| |
 |
Rik_ wrote: |
| |
Maybe we're just old stick in the muds JD "caught some where in time" !!  , but I agree to some extent with what you say, I've not really bought much Metallica since master of puppets and likes Def Leppard appeal to a totally different audience to what they did in their first couple of albums.
Must be hard for likes of maiden & metallica though to follow up early successes and keep it going for years If they don't do something a bit different they get accused of every album being the same like AC/DC or Status Quo, they'll not win many new fans but at least you know what you're getting. I think some bands just get too big if that's possible?
| |
|
J.D. DIAMOND wrote: |
| |
Whatever it may be,Iron Maiden has "SUCKED" for the last 25 years now(1986 Somewhere In Shit album) with only one decent album(2006). The Final Frontier is utterly a gross display of shit,its boring,and spanks of shit song writting.
This band used to crank out cult classics like Where Eagles Dare,Flash Of The Blade,The Prisoner,To tame A Land,Aces High,Wrathchild,Phantom Of The Opera...and then came the Somewhere In Shit album....sure Seventh Son was ok,and then 2006's A Matter Of Life And Death was "ok" but everything else is shit.
After Powerslave and since they wrote the Somewhere In Crap album they have "NEVER RECOVERED". There are a small percentage of fan..(a small) that like the newer Maiden just as much as the old,but not many. Thats like saying there are a small percentage of fans that like the shit Turbo album too. Same thing. Iron Maiden are the 2nd biggest disappointment in metal history with Shitallica at number one.
| |
|
Rik_ wrote: |
| |
Speaking in general, I reckon what sometimes happens is bands develop as musicians from the early days and want to showcase this in their albums. You often hear them saying it in interviews. This seems in many cases, to result in songs becoming technical magnum opuses, or concept albums. Sometimes though it's the rawness of the earlier music which attracted a lot of people to them, many of who are not accomplished musicians ourselves and don't appreciate the "improved" direction of the newer stuff. Probably this is why after a while you get a back to their roots album.
I remember that documentary a few years ago featuring Saxon where Harvey Goldsmith the PR man was trying to basically commercialise the band sound to appeal to a new audience. The band didn't like what he had planned for them and told him it was great to get new fans, but they had fans who'd been following them for nearly 30 years to consider too.
Edited at: Friday, April 22, 2011 3:12:49 AM |
|
|
Edited at: Friday, April 22, 2011 7:43:52 AM |
|
