Maiden new album in 2014

Forostar said:
Well, at least we got Rod Smallwood, who probably has enough sense to realize that Maiden should not wait so long with studio efforts. They are no Metallica, they are no Priest, they are no Kiss, they are no Sabbath, and -thank God- they are no Guns'n'Roses. There's more than touring. They are the energetic and creative band called Iron Maiden. If they do not want to be associated with other (sometimes cabaret) acts, they've got to continue by doing what they preach.

I am confident it will be 2014. No excuse for 2015 (there are some, but they are more of the dramatic kind, e.g. like something that happened with Neil Peart). Time enough to do other things; both now and when the band is over.

Mosh, I can't disagree with you, when you say I can't change their course (I do not even want to do something against the band's own will), but I surely can comment on it, even if such commentary is not very important. ;)
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with you wanting an album next year, I too hope that we get new Maiden in 2014. However, I do disagree with this sense of entitlement from saying things like there's "no excuse" for them to release an album in 2015. They can do whatever they want, they don't owe us anything.

Also, you mentioned Rush, I dunno if you followed the making of Clockwork Angels but the reason that album took so long is because they recorded two songs and decided that they'd rather tour more and finish the album later. They didn't rush the album, and it did take 5 years but I think it was worth the wait. In fact I'd say it's their best since the early 80's, at least. Had they forced themselves to write and release it in 2011, I don't think it would've been very good. I hope Maiden handles their album making process the same way.
 
You read wrong. I mentioned Peart. He lost his wife and daughter which caused a delay in their career.

Maiden don't own us anything. I have never said that, I explained it differently.
 
Right, but since you brought that up I figured I'd point out Clockwork Angels, an album that took almost as long Vapor Trails. (Technically longer, since Rush was on hiatus because of the events in Peart's life).
 
As for the Rush comparison, I think that there was an implicit assumption in our wish to see Maiden release a new album very soon : they can (or at least give that impression) produce new music almost effortlessly : I mean, some of the guys are very prolific, and they complete each other almost perfectly. We know their process : allowing themselves a two or three months for the writing and the rehearsals, three for the recording, and one for the mixing. If I recall well, they only changed that pattern once, for X Factor, because they had so much to prove. So I'd say that the only matter is when they decide to record an album.
 
Yep. And in the case of The X-Factor the recording of the album took very long, also due to difficult personal issues in Steve's family life.
 
Mosh said:
Why? They're not obligated to make an album every 3-4 years. I'd rather them make one when the time is right instead of force one just because it's been 4 years. Plus it's not like they haven't been active since 2010.
Click to expand...

I just don't want them to work too much. With all this touring and stuff I kinda want them to take a break.
 
I don't see any new material coming out until 2015 now and I'm not particularly bothered. The time between albums has been steadily increasing in recent years and with this increased time for creative flow have come (in my opinion) their two best albums to date. As its been thrown around that their next studio album will be their last I say take as long as possible ;).
 
There is a lot of planning to do with a new album, and if they do not have plans to start writing by the beginning of 2014 (which is the first real oppurtunity I can see from how they use to work) there is not really much of a possibility to have it out until 2015. I do believe that if they do another after these 15, which I am content they will if nothing unforeseen happens, I doubt they will rush it out.

We are in the position that Bruce talked about in a Swedish magazine while discussing the possibility of The Final Frontier being their last - "I wonder what they will do next?"

Personally, I hope they do something different than their last. I am not very much interested in another The Final Frontier-production. I doubt they would change producer though, and since somewhat raw and dry albums are what Shirley has been doing with Europe and other great bands recently that hope isn't really something that I believe in.
 
I read somewhere that Adrian said that they will do more short songs , i like when iron maiden play long songs but would be cool if they only put 1 or 2 in a record. I think some members of the band are tired of long songs expecially when the long songs are like the angel and the gambler ( why so long?)
 
That was just a throwaway thing, his opinion, there are no plans for the album or for the songs. This was clarified to me in some other thread. :D
 
dickinson1978 said:
I think some members of the band are tired of long songs expecially when the long songs are like the angel and the gambler ( why so long?)
Click to expand...
. To my knowledge, none of them never said anything like this recently. Only Bruce showed some concern on the subject, but that was back in 1999, at the beginning of reunion era.
By the way, I made this awful mistake in the thread title :rolleyes: , but I don't know how to correct it. Could anyone help ?
 
Shortly after TFF came out, H mentioned that they might go for shorter songs on the next album. That was 3 years ago, so who knows where they are now.
 
I'm sure the new album will have great songs regardless of length, so I'm more concerned about the production/sound which has been hit (BNW, AMOL&D) & miss (DOD, TFF) in the reunion era.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top