The Genesis of Somewhere in Time

[Forostar]

I guess it did, but that does not make the song any better.

For most fans it certainly does. Surely the highlight of the song for me, although it has strong competition from Dave's solo section, which is a masterpiece.

Very interesting discussion guys. I do think this belongs on the Somewhere in Time board in the Commentary section, though.

Somewhere In Time

For me, initially, it is not that easy to come to terms with the idea that the album did not turn out the way they (all) thought it would turn out.
But on the other hand, I love the album and its sound. So: I'm sorry for the people (in or outside of the band), but: GREAT decision, Steve Harris and company, for taking this direction. And if my country's involvement was an improvement (rather than just "the" location for vocals and guitars), I'm extra proud of it.

 

[Forostar]

Wait, hold on. Wasted Years was played in '88 alongside HCW, but only HCW kept reappearing consistently after that. It skipped the '90/'91 tour but was on every other 90s tour as a setlist staple, while WY appeared a few times in '93 and then disappeared until it was voted in by fans in '99. It then disappeared again until '08, while HCW still got played in '03.

They really didn't start playing Wasted Years with regularity until 2008, when it feels like they finally figured out it's a total fan favorite and it immediately stayed on for basically every tour it fit on afterwards until LotB. That song only got the respect it deserved well after Bruce returned to the band.

Rather than anything else, Blaze not able to sing it in this key naturally had to do with the (continuous) disappearance after '93.
Adrian not being in the band in the early nineties may have to do with this as well. This really was his thing out of all Maiden songs and the band took their time to reintroduce it, rather than not respecting it. Maybe it was a form of respect to not play it! And yeah, again it is very logical that your mind is busy with current stuff. After Adrian left, the set included rougher songs from No Prayer, that is what they liked back then: sticking to their guns.
I love that attitude. More than: let's bow to fan favourites.

 

[Forostar]

If this were 2006, I'd agree with you. Up until then, there was nothing particularly noticeable about SIT's representation in live setlists. But things changed with SBIT. Although the accompanying history DVD only covered Powerslave and Live After Death, the tour was clearly designed to highlight the entire mid-eighties period from Powerslave to SSOASS. The SIT Eddie was the one chosen for the branding, and SIT tracks were picked for the setlist... and that's where the imbalance comes in. There were four Powerslave songs, three SSOASS ones and only two from SIT. From my memory, I think this is what really started the legend of SIT being the forgotten classic album, and it really picked up when the Maiden England DVD and tour made things even worse. Granted, there were a few things people picked on before, such as there being no official live recording or the epic from the album not being played live, but I think before 2008 that was more trivia for the diehards than an influence on common fan opinion.

(The following is mostly speculation on my part with some opinion thrown in)

If you ask me, I can imagine Maiden having good reasons for not bringing out any of the deep cuts from that album. Most of the songs simply don't lend themselves for live performances. SIT is the album with the highest degree of studio magic, and Maiden always had the ambition of performing their songs live the way they were on the record. If it's true that they re-worked Heaven Can Wait into a live anthem, that may even mean they were aware of this as the album was being made and they felt they needed to compensate. If you listen to the bootlegs from the tour, songs like CSIT and Sea of Madness don't really spark. I'm not really sure why that is for CSIT, it's not all that different from Moonchild in terms of structure. Sea of Madness on the other hand has nothing for a crowd to work with. Loneliness was dropped almost immediately, and I can really see why, it must have been physically truly exhausting for Bruce to sing. Stranger in a Strange Land does slow the pace, although with the lengthy instrumental sections of modern Maiden songs, I don't think it would be as noticeable anymore. With Alexander, I can see a 50/50 chance of it picking up live, but the possibilities for crowd singalongs during the instrumentals are relatively limited and the most promising parts really end quite abruptly. I'm pretty sure Deja Vu would sink like a stone, there's nothing in there an audience could catch onto. That leaves us with Heaven Can Wait and Wasted Years, the only two songs that ended up being setlist mainstays, for good reasons.

I'm not saying I don't like SIT or the songs I talked about - I do! But I can see why Maiden don't pay so much attention to it in their setlists without them necessarily having to dislike the album. Maiden feed off audience participation and activity, so that's going to be their main influence over evaluating whether a song works well or not. Whether it's okay for us to just stand there and listen, I'm afraid, doesn't matter to them.

I believe that being so overly busy with the audience, that's something since 1999. Or 1998 when the Blaze hate was raging on.
I do believe that the band stuck to their guns, and had less eye for the audience, in relation to setlists before 1999.
I think your comments on these SIT songs are personal (as are my opinions) and I don't think you and I can know if people would not like to hear these songs these days. We can also not know if the people will appreciate it. I am positive though. The songs were very different back then, now everybody knows them, people have had their time. In the far past, the band did not care about others and did what they wanted (they did it again in 2006, but they had a united feeling about that album; and I feel the band welcomed that unison; it made them stronger in own setlist-confidence, for a while at least).

 

[srfc]

For me, initially, it is not that easy to come to terms with the idea that the album did not turn out the way they (all) thought it would turn out.

Maybe it turned out better than they expected rather than a disappointment.

Also, I've been thinking about this and I speculate that all that has really happened between the Bahamas and Holland is they made the decision to ditch Bruce's track. This then resulted in them padding out the other tracks as a way of compensating for the loss of running time on the album. I don't think that there has been any other major change to the composition of the other tracks, as really how much more of a change can be made to the existing rhythm tracks?

 

[Forostar]

My cynical opinion is that in 92 it became clear 80's style Heavy Metal was a dead duck and Bruce was like a rat off a sinking ship, hence him trying to rap in Shoot all the Clowns and getting Nirvana's producer in for Skunkworks.

Well, he did not want to include this (Aerosmith type of) song on the album and was forced to include it.

 

[Forostar]

Maybe it turned out better than they expected rather than a disappointment.

Also, I've been thinking about this and I speculate that all that has really happened between the Bahamas and Holland is they made the decision to ditch Bruce's track. This then resulted in them padding out the other tracks as a way of compensating for the loss of running time on the album. I don't think that there has been any other major change to the composition of the other tracks, as really how much more of a change can be made to the existing rhythm tracks?

I wonder if people in this thread are implying that the "guitars and vocals recorded in Holland"-line of thought does not do justice to what really happened?

Do people out here believe everything was re(-re)corded in the Netherlands: meaning for all the things they changed, right? I mean, if they extended songs in Holland; naturally newly recorded drums and bass (synth) were going to be needed as well.

srfc: to address your question further, I guess for Maiden it is impossible to replace rhythm tracks, while keeping other music and vocals in that same segment. Could Birch intersect bass and drums for the midpiece in Heaven Can Wait ( A )? Perhaps he could. Perhaps Nicko and Steve re-recorded the whole song (as we know it now) in Nassau ( B ). I think A and B make more sense than doing all the recordings for (a) new piece(s) in a different place.

So, might the entire band have recorded new parts in Holland? If that is the case, how the hell do these connections flow so well? And how come the (especially) drum and bass sound stays the same so well? It really sounds as if all rhythm parts were recorded in Nassau and not in two different studios.

So, I imagine Steve and Nicko recorded more than what was used. First they selected songbatch A, then cut out Bruce's (co-)written song and then 'Arry and Nicko recorded some extra stuff (if that was not done earlier on; maybe they had it already before it was considered) to extend one or more songs. Then, guitars and vocals were added in another studio. I read the interviews and I do not see anything contradictional to what I say here, nor to the official biography.

 

[srfc]

Could Birch intersect bass and drums for the midpiece in Heaven Can Wait ( A )?

Yeah, I have no idea what the actual difference was between the earlier versions of the tracks and the final version so it's only wild speculation, but it would be fairly straight forward to extend sections from 4 repetitions to 8 etc. by repeating the existing audio

EDIT: there's also sections of synth at the start of CSIT and HCW where there are no drums, it's possible they could have been added to make the songs longer. Possibly Deja-Vu intro could have been tacked on too.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

I wonder if people in this thread are implying that the "guitars and vocals recorded in Holland"-line of thought does not do justice to what really happened?

Absolutely no - what made me post about it in the first place, is the discrepancy between listing of Nassau-laid tracks and final post-Holland product. I did mention that I suspect some cut and paste was done in the rhythm section to accommodate new arrangements, and intro/outro work (which doesn't require drums).

Well, he did not want to include this (Aerosmith type of) song on the album and was forced to include it.

People forget Sacred Cowboys - one of the best pre-AoB Bruce tracks, heavy riffs, heavy groove, melodic, great solo, ends on a banger. Contains rap or better said spoken lyrics. It's just experimentation with vocal technique.

I believe that being so overly busy with the audience, that's something since 1999. Or 1998 when the Blaze hate was raging on.
I do believe that the band stuck to their guns, and had less eye for the audience, in relation to setlists before 1999.
I think your comments on these SIT songs are personal (as are my opinions) and I don't think you and I can know if people would not like to hear these songs these days. We can also not know if the people will appreciate it. I am positive though. The songs were very different back then, now everybody knows them, people have had their time. In the far past, the band did not care about others and did what they wanted (they did it again in 2006, but they had a united feeling about that album; and I feel the band welcomed that unison; it made them stronger in own setlist-confidence, for a while at least).

With the types of venues that Maiden play today, with the acoustic those places can achieve, with all the technology that they carry around with them and the expertise of engineers around them, and 3 guitarists locked in joint groove for the last 20 years, in my opinion it is completely absurd to claim that SiT cannot be replicated live today. The synths and the chorus and the drum room reverb, don't make this album, the ferocity of playing, the performance and the layers of guitars do.

For me, initially, it is not that easy to come to terms with the idea that the album did not turn out the way they (all) thought it would turn out.
But on the other hand, I love the album and its sound. So: I'm sorry for the people (in or outside of the band), but: GREAT decision, Steve Harris and company, for taking this direction. And if my country's involvement was an improvement (rather than just "the" location for vocals and guitars), I'm extra proud of it.

I love the end product. I do hope that the way that product was done did not hamper it's live potential, but that doesn't make the record any less stellar.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

I also want to say this about SiT tracks live, if the band tried to capture the energy and not both the energy and the vibe, it would be doable.

Provided Nicko used a double pedal to maintain album tempos, and with a nice heavy distorted guitar sound without any of those 80s effects, let's see how this could breathe :

1. CSiT - Tape intro. Murray/Gers harmonies, Smith rhythm guitar. Would have same energy on the album. Would not be fast and lack bottom end heaviness (rendering it shallow) like in 80s.
2. WY - proven, works.
3. Sea Of Madness - this one is hard to fit in the setlist due to pacing. But it would work better, because Harris/McBrain groove better nowadays.
4. HCW - proven, works.
5. Loneliness - again setlist fit problems, and then you have synth pads creating atmosphere throughout. This one may not work.
6. Stranger - proven, works.
7. Deja Vu - I feel this one could be sonically rearranged to compensate lack of synths with 3rd guitar providing texturing at places. And the last part of the instrumental, when the number of guitars playing the harmony increases, could be done live with three of them to a great effect. The song also has crowd potential in that part.
8. ATG - Well. Here the synths play a role. They even 'lead' the chord progression in the middle of the song. I don't think this one would work live as much as people want it to, so go ahead and kill me.

Anyway, they rehearsed CSiT and it sounded bad. I think Nicko couldn't maintain the tempo and slowed down it would sound like ass. If he doesn't get around the age-induced motorics loss with a double pedal, songs like CSiT are permanently off the chart. They also rehearsed ATG and it didn't work well so you're free to hypothesize why that is so.

 

[Forostar]

Absolutely no - what made me post about it in the first place, is the discrepancy between listing of Nassau-laid tracks and final post-Holland product. I did mention that I suspect some cut and paste was done in the rhythm section to accommodate new arrangements, and intro/outro work (which doesn't require drums).

Do you think no new bass and drums were recorded in Holland at all?

Interesting if the intro to Deja-Vu would have completely been added (new compared to plans in Nassau), because Dave's *The Man of Sorrows intro was a demo. Written, recorded in demo stage, finished before entering the studio. No drums on Deja-Vu intro, but I wonder if we can hear some bass on it? If yes, and if Steve added it in Holland, the credits in the booklet and the "bass and drums in Nassau"-line of thought is not correct.

EDIT: there is both drums and bass on the intro of Deja-Vu!
@Zare which intro's and outro's are you talking about? Let's see which are with and which without drums and/or bass.


*Different songs, different era's, but still interesting to compare.

 

[Forostar]

I also want to say this about SiT tracks live, if the band tried to capture the energy and not both the energy and the vibe, it would be doable.

Provided Nicko used a double pedal to maintain album tempos, and with a nice heavy distorted guitar sound without any of those 80s effects, let's see how this could breathe :

1. CSiT - Tape intro. Murray/Gers harmonies, Smith rhythm guitar. Would have same energy on the album. Would not be fast and lack bottom end heaviness (rendering it shallow) like in 80s.
2. WY - proven, works.
3. Sea Of Madness - this one is hard to fit in the setlist due to pacing. But it would work better, because Harris/McBrain groove better nowadays.
4. HCW - proven, works.
5. Loneliness - again setlist fit problems, and then you have synth pads creating atmosphere throughout. This one may not work.
6. Stranger - proven, works.
7. Deja Vu - I feel this one could be sonically rearranged to compensate lack of synths with 3rd guitar providing texturing at places. And the last part of the instrumental, when the number of guitars playing the harmony increases, could be done live with three of them to a great effect. The song also has crowd potential in that part.
8. ATG - Well. Here the synths play a role. They even 'lead' the chord progression in the middle of the song. I don't think this one would work live as much as people want it to, so go ahead and kill me.

In general: I don't think Nicko is used enough to playing double bass pedals, to do well enough that way.

Sea of Madness: this is difficult drumming in the verses and hard to sing for Bruce in the chorus. Loneliness did not work in 1986, they could not play it then. I don't see how they could do it now. This is very tough material, for Bruce and Nicko. CSIT will be hard indeed.

Zare, I miss your arguments about why AtG would not work. Synth can be played by Michael Kenney.

I think these five could work:
WY
HCW
SIASL
Deja-Vu
AtG

and these are (unfortunately!) very difficult, possibly cannot be executed well enough:
CSIT
SoM (least difficult for Nicko, of these three)
LOTLDR (most difficult for both, of these three)

Anyway, they rehearsed CSiT and it sounded bad. I think Nicko couldn't maintain the tempo and slowed down it would sound like ass. If he doesn't get around the age-induced motorics loss with a double pedal, songs like CSiT are permanently off the chart. They also rehearsed ATG and it didn't work well so you're free to hypothesize why that is so.

Can you enlighten me further (again) on this? I may have forgotten but I'd like to read about it.

 

[GhostofCain]

Do you think no new bass and drums were recorded in Holland at all?

I doubt it. According to Steve Harris, bass and drums were recorded in the Bahamas, vocals and guitars in the Netherlands, and the mixing was done at Electric Lady Studios in New York (as said on page 258 of the Run to Hills official biography, 3rd edition).

We know that sometimes the official biography is an edited version of events, but I do not think Steve would have had any reason to tell any porkies about this.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

Do you think no new bass and drums were recorded in Holland at all?

Interesting if the intro to Deja-Vu would have completely been added (new compared to plans in Nassau), because Dave's *The Man of Sorrows intro was a demo. Written, recorded in demo stage, finished before entering the studio. No drums on Deja-Vu intro, but I wonder if we can hear some bass on it? If yes, and if Steve added it in Holland, the credits in the booklet and the "bass and drums in Nassau"-line of thought is not correct.

EDIT: there is both drums and bass on the intro of Deja-Vu!
@Zare which intro's and outro's are you talking about? Let's see which are with and which without drums and/or bass.


*Different songs, different era's, but still interesting to compare.

If you take the "bass and drums in Nassau" as gospel then sure, but I'm not sure we should do that. Yet

I still believe intros might've been added/modified in Holland, bass and drums. There's no links for Wasted Years drum track now on YT (weird), but the drum reverb is not there at all times. In intro, the drums are reverb-less. This reverb is not signal processing as much as the natural room sound, that's evident from the record.

Deja Vu's intro might've been done in complete in Holland if you ask me. Check out Harris's sound in the most similar part to Deja Vu's intro - the breakdown of SIASL

Sounds like classic top notch Steve. Now relisten to Deja Vu's intro and tell me do you think it is the exact same bass sound? It sounds more buried in the mix, lacks Harris' signature treble. And the cymbal work is also (in terms of sound and playing) really non impressive.

On top of that, the second guitar, is really unremarkable, wobbly, and strangely locked in the with the bass.

I give 50/50 chance that Deja Vu's intro is just Steve and Dave in the studio, cymbals are copy/paste work.

In general: I don't think Nicko is used enough to playing double bass pedals, to do well enough that way.

Sea of Madness: this is difficult drumming in the verses and hard to sing for Bruce in the chorus. Loneliness did not work in 1986, they could not play it then. I don't see how they could do it now. This is very tough material, for Bruce and Nicko. CSIT will be hard indeed.

Zare, I miss your arguments about why AtG would not work. Synth can be played by Michael Kenney.

I think these five could work:
WY
HCW
SIASL
Deja-Vu
AtG

and these are (unfortunately!) very difficult, possibly cannot be executed well enough:
CSIT
SoM (least difficult for Nicko, of these three)
LOTLDR (most difficult for both, of these three)


Can you enlighten me further (again) on this? I may have forgotten but I'd like to read about it.

Heh I agree with you. The work required to do justice to these songs, today, is more than they're willing to invest, because they have XY songs they'd rather perform (naturally) than digging some old stuff up and then working around the fact that they're not 30 anymore.

However I disagree with the others' opinion that it is the studio magic why these songs do not work live. Lets remind ourselves this is not Pink Floyd. If you listen to this album at normal volume you'll feel the space vibe and how it adds to the music. However if you crank it up, it becomes just "aggressive metal sound", as the effects get drained in the way proper speakers respond to high volume. The bottom end gets quite a punch when speakers start pushing the air out due to enough power in the signal.

ATG would not work because of the soundscape.

Why I don't like any ATG cover (including our own) that much, is the lack of the soundscape and the fact that the original grooves and no cover does, as much as they try to either replicate the tempo or do their own band groove over it. Let me clarify

On the album, the two "triplets" that guitar play after each even verse line (first instance after Bruce says 'Greece'), are strummed chords, played like you'd play funk. The phyrigian dominant bassy guitar TA-da-da-dam that replaces it in the same spot after odd verse lines, are heavy vibrato single notes. If you try to play this on a regular setup it's going to sound way off. Why it works is the GK RL250 sound with chorus enabled. The chorus effect responds dynamically to the signal and it is able to give an extra edge if you play hard (chorus was also used in this manner on Master of Puppets), but it will still glue notes together. Played like this you get a time dynamic in to the powerchord. For specifics anyone can ask me somewhere else - I've used this amp for 12 years now and there's a perfect technical explanation to this. Due to this the guitars in the verses groove nice although it's not actually a groovy tempo.

Since I've been sitting at this post for more than an hour I need to go now - let's just say that ATG suffers not only from synths but also from the way Murray/Smith adapted their guitar playing to accommodate for their new equipment. If you 1-2 through ATG on a regular setup it sounds IMHO like generic power metal because it loses the groove.

But there's one thing - if they'd actually slowed it down from the album tempo in the main part, then their current (as in last 30 years) sound setup would do it justice. The guitars would be able to breathe more.

For the CSiT bit that comes from Rod, doesn't it? He said the band practiced it and it sounded bad. Well I think the most likely culprit is Nicko.

 

[GhostofCain]

Rod did indeed tell some fans that CSIT did not sound good live, but he was referring to the song live back in 1986-1987.

 

[Forostar]

I'll react first to the intro outro subject.

If you take the "bass and drums in Nassau" as gospel then sure, but I'm not sure we should do that. Yet

I still believe intros might've been added/modified in Holland, bass and drums. There's no links for Wasted Years drum track now on YT (weird), but the drum reverb is not there at all times. In intro, the drums are reverb-less. This reverb is not signal processing as much as the natural room sound, that's evident from the record.

Deja Vu's intro might've been done in complete in Holland if you ask me. Check out Harris's sound in the most similar part to Deja Vu's intro - the breakdown of SIASL

Sounds like classic top notch Steve. Now relisten to Deja Vu's intro and tell me do you think it is the exact same bass sound? It sounds more buried in the mix, lacks Harris' signature treble. And the cymbal work is also (in terms of sound and playing) really non impressive.

On top of that, the second guitar, is really unremarkable, wobbly, and strangely locked in the with the bass.

I give 50/50 chance that Deja Vu's intro is just Steve and Dave in the studio, cymbals are copy/paste work.

which studio? The same? In Holland? Yes you've said that. So in this case you think the "bass and drums in Nassau"-line of thought is not correct.

cymbals are copy/paste work.

Well, from what? From something recorded in Nassau? Hmm, but I'd say the the timing of this cymbal work is important. Why could he and Steve not have done that together in Nassau, as planned. And guitars were added in Holland? It is more buried in mix, because the intro has a different treatment. It was meant to be(?). OR(!) guitars were also (partly) done in Nassau, and spiced up (new tracks added) in Holland.

Not sure where you think the drums and bass in WY are recorded (intro).

 

[Deleted member 7164]

So in this case you think the "bass and drums in Nassau"-line of thought is not correct.

I don't think it's hard truth, there might've been moments on the album in the rhythm department that were done late on.

Hmm, but I'd say the the timing of this cymbal work is important. Why could he and Steve not have done that together in Nassau, as planned. And guitars were added in Holland? It is more buried in mix, because the intro has a different treatment. It was meant to be(?). OR(!) guitars were also (partly) done in Nassau, and spiced up (new tracks added) in Holland.

I hear three or four cymbals. Maybe not copy-paste, but could've been done ad-hoc with no issues. The three of them could've done that in the same room, and later on Dave adds the background guitar by playing tightly to Steve's bass.

In any case I don't think we will ever have enough info to say for sure what has happened in Nassau and what in Holland.

What for me is the most interesting in the whole story and why I started talking about it again - the 9th song, Dickinson credit. The hypothetical extending of intros and that stuff, is just there to try explaining why this track didn't stay on the album. The track was A-quality as it survived the development long enough and it didn't end up as B-side.

 

[srfc]

Is there any evidence of Nicko being in Holland?

I can't imagine he would have traveled to Holland if he wasn't needed. Was he living in Florida then?

 

[Ruflux]

Why it works is the GK RL250 sound with chorus enabled. The chorus effect responds dynamically to the signal and it is able to give an extra edge if you play hard (chorus was also used in this manner on Master of Puppets), but it will still glue notes together. Played like this you get a time dynamic in to the powerchord. For specifics anyone can ask me somewhere else - I've used this amp for 12 years now and there's a perfect technical explanation to this. Due to this the guitars in the verses groove nice although it's not actually a groovy tempo.

While I appreciate the technical explanation of using chorus to create interesting effects in music outside of its original sole purpose, it should be noted that Dave and Adrian both had chorus effect pedals in their setups and were almost certainly using those, not the (comparatively rather limited) chorus included in the GK amp. They both used chorus before SiT, after all, and I don't believe Dave ever played live with a GK head.

 

[Deleted member 7164]

Are you sure they didn't use the onboard chorus? I've looked into this a long time ago, but the basis of the sound was ADA overdriven 250ML.

Also - bootlegs. Chorus on guitar is on from start to finish - it's there even in the "early days" songs. So I don't think it's a pedal. Curious if you know what was exact recording setup of SiT.

 

[Mosh]

I thought it was long accepted that they used the amp chorus on the album. It’s not unusual that the studio gear differs from the live gear, and pedals are often unnecessary in the studio since different guitar sounds are going to be tracked separately in most cases (rather than live when you’re switching in and out of effects on the fly).