Which live album best represents Iron Maiden

nuno_c

nuno_c

A hollow universe in space
I've been listening a lot to Maiden's live albums and i have this question... For you, personally, what live album do you see as being the most representative of the band?

Also, i think the band sounds better live today than in the 80's, not saying though that they sounded bad back then. But they did play the songs too fast in those days, and that sometimes does not make a song sound better. What are your thoughts?
 
Rock In Rio, for me, is the band at its best. Amazing performances, with an amazing setlist.

As for the earlier live albums, I think Live After Death is a bit overrated, I much prefer the Flight 666 soundtrack over it. It's just a better display than LAD, the band is better now than they were back in '84, Bruce especially. Flight 666's ROTAM blows the LAD version out of the water!

If Flight 666 had more of the setlist that LAD had, like 22 Acacia Avenue, Children of the Dammed, Phantom, and Die With Your Boots On, I would never even listen to Live After Death.
 
Current live album poll and discussion:
http://forum.maidenfans.com/threads/favorite-maiden-live-album-2010-edition.20110/

Note that this poll and the best album poll will both be reset to zero when the new album is released, just like we did when TFF came out.

nuno_c said:
Also, i think the band sounds better live today than in the 80's, not saying though that they sounded bad back then. But they did play the songs too fast in those days, and that sometimes does not make a song sound better. What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

This is a more interesting matter for discussion. There are a few songs that have slowed over the years, especially the middle section of "Iron Maiden".
 
nuno_c said:
Also, i think the band sounds better live today than in the 80's, not saying though that they sounded bad back then. But they did play the songs too fast in those days, and that sometimes does not make a song sound better. What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
I completely agree. I think we are living in the "golden age" of Iron Maiden live prowess. I agree with @THESEVENTHMARINER that Rock In Rio blows LAD out of the water, and for me that is the definitive live recording. An excellent, career-spanning setlist, an historic gig at a great venue, and a great performance by evey memeber of the band.
 
I've always liked their fast live versions. The speed of Fear of the Dark and The Evil that Men Do on A Real Live One, contribute to making these the best versions there are.

The recent anti-speed propaganda in the last 5 years or so sound more like a cover-up; giving a different reason for not being able anymore to pull it off as fast as they once could.

Wasted Years (and another particular song that slipped my mind) was played very slow on the latest tour. Not nice.
 
Lego said:
I completely agree. I think we are living in the "golden age" of Iron Maiden live prowess. I agree with @THESEVENTHMARINER that Rock In Rio blows LAD out of the water, and for me that is the definitive live recording. An excellent, career-spanning setlist, an historic gig at a great venue, and a great performance by evey memeber of the band.
Click to expand...
As far as I'm concerned, Adrian's solos in LAD's Rime, Aces High and Powerslaves blows away his whole contribution on Rock in Rio (his is the smallest from all members).
 
Forostar said:
I've always liked their fast live versions. The speed of Fear of the Dark and The Evil that Men Do on A Real Live One, contribute to making these the best versions there are.

The recent anti-speed propaganda in the last 5 years or so sound more like a cover-up; giving a different reason for not being able anymore to pull it off as fast as they once could.

Wasted Years (and another particular song that slipped my mind) was played very slow on the latest tour. Not nice.
Click to expand...
I prefer somewhere in the middle, around the speed they played things from 2003-2010. Some of those ultra-fast versions from LAD and ME are just ridiculous. However, Wasted Years and The Trooper sound particularly awkward now, and many of the tunes have lost some energy live because of the slower tempos.
 
Lego said:
I prefer somewhere in the middle, around the speed they played things from 2003-2010. Some of those ultra-fast versions from LAD and ME are just ridiculous.
Click to expand...
They are not ridiculous. I'm afraid this is just what the band literally said on some relatively recent DVD. No one ever was bothered about it, before they started to openly diss this element from pre-reunion tours.
Lego said:
However, Wasted Years and The Trooper sound particularly awkward now, and many of the tunes have lost some energy live because of the slower tempos.
Click to expand...
I also find the "recent" fast riff in Fear of the Dark too slow really. Maybe it's because I am used to (and grew up with) the manner the band played this song in the first 10 years (not that video compilation ;) ). But also there, the speed really attributed to the energy and vibe.
 
I don't think the band saying they used to play some songs super fast is a cover-up.

The songs are meant to be played at a certain speed in order to sound the way they are supposed to sound, creating a certain mood or feel that is unique to that specefic song, whether the song is fast, slow or mid tempo.

IF the band argued that sometimes the play at the wrong speed because of the excitement, i think that would pretty much be a cover up, since many bands do use the live excitement as a way to hide their sloppiness and/or their lack of ability to properly play.
 
My favorite live Maiden album is Beast Over Hammersmith. Speaking of tempo, it is the only official live recording in which "Hallowed Be Thy Name" is played at close to the "proper" speed (i.e., matching the speed of the studio recording). Agree that Rock in Rio is excellent, and I still have a soft spot for LaD, even though Bruce doesn't sound so hot on sides 1-3 and they'd already begun to screw around with the tempo in Hallowed.
 
The BBC Archives CD from Eddies Archive has Seventh Son live from Donington 88, but other than that yes :)

I just love it because it has tracks like Killers, Still Life, Infinite Dreams, Die With Your Boots, Prisoner....Really strong and different!
 
^ Totally agree (although Infinite Dreams was not an unexpected choice at the time). The setlist is great, the production fantastic, the agressivity mindblowing, and Dave's solos are just awesome. He was really at his best.
 
Live speed is a tricky thing. You don't want the songs to be lifeless or lose energy, but you also don't want to go off the rails in speed. The faster the band gets, the more difficult it becomes to maintain pulse. Luckily Nicko and Steve are a solid rhythm section so this isn't usually an issue, but the tempos did get out of hand in the 80s. It wasn't something that was only brought to light with the Maiden England doc, this has been discussed on this very forum before. Some stuff on Maiden England is way too fast; Nicko and Steve aren't completely locked in at times and Bruce is often struggling to keep up. Same with those albums in the 90s, the pulse is almost completely gone. A couple of the songs are slower now but I'd take something slow that still has a pulse over something fast that isn't locked in.

As for favorite live album, it has to be Rock In Rio. Amazing setlist, performance, and helped cement my love for the band.
 
Mosh said:
Some stuff on Maiden England is way too fast; Nicko and Steve aren't completely locked in at times and Bruce is often struggling to keep up.
Click to expand...
Examples?

Bruce's struggling doesn't have to do with the tempo per se. Perhaps he had a bad day, being more out of breath than during fitter gigs. He also struggled during his verses in the SSOASS speech (pause was too long).

EDIT:
Mosh said:
It wasn't something that was only brought to light with the Maiden England doc, this has been discussed on this very forum before.
Click to expand...
I don't remember this has been discussed before the band started about it themselves. Perhaps they started this stuff on an earlier DVD.
 
The one I remember most is Killers. The rhythm is all over the place in the first verse and it's especially noticeable because everyone is playing the same rhythm. Luckily the tempo settles in by the 2nd verse but it falls off here and there throughout. Skimming through the other tracks and they actually aren't too bad. Will have to put the whole album on later and keep an eye out for that.

And the struggling does have to do with the tempo. Faster tempos means Bruce might have to change up his breathing spots in between lines and that may trip him up.
 
Perhaps one (or more of the guys) was playing in the wrong speed, but that doesn't mean that the overall tempo was too high.

By the way a cool trivia with this song: in Killers, they used image of Dave's solo from one gig and the sound of the other. Pretty cool because Dave couldn't notice the difference when he inspected the result (he always plays the solos exactly the same, note for note).
 
It means the tempo is lacking in pulse, which is what I was talking about in my initial post. I've seen interviews with Nicko as early as the 90s mentioning that Steve likes to push the tempo, which is fine but there needs to be a solid tempo established for everyone to lock into. To me it sounds like Steve keeps pushing the tempo on that first verse and everyone else is having trouble keeping up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top