18th Studio Album discussion

[dickinson1978]

I'm not sure I can agree, it depends, some Reunion era songs are not with that long intros. TFP tour had 5 songs with slow and long intros and it was good. The 2010 tour had a lot in a row (4+ ,iirc), but I think they could have swapped just one or two.

This. Who wants this.?

They can play
The wickerman
Ghost of navigator
Brave new world
Wildest dreams
Dance of death
Brighter than 1000 suns
These colors dont run
longest day or for greater
El dorado
The talisman
If eternity should fail
Speed of light
Book of souls
Stratego
Writing on the wall
Hell on earth
I dont see a boring setlist

 

[Kalata]

A build-up intro works brilliantly live if it features in a few songs per set. Not every song or every other song.
I thought the 2006 AMOLAD set flowed better than the 2010 set, because AMOLAD has a good flow track-to-track.

I get you, but the 2006 tour also had 5 such songs. The energetic stuff was almost about the same number.
For the 2010 tour, swap No More Lies with Rainmaker and it's fine. A live set needs balance, just like an album, agreed. But boring and drain energy, with great build-up and popular cuts from the era (without one or two)? Each to their own. AMOLAD album flow is not perfect, but I like it.

It could be a good topic for the Maiden blasphemy thread, but being both a big fan of the reunion era and having seen the show myself in person (in addition to several bootlegs years after the fact), I think the 2010 setlist was kinda ill-conceived. It gets a lot of (well deserved) credit for giving the reunion era much needed attention, especially considering the last expansive tour they had done in North America for a new album had been Brave New World - most audiences had not heard a single song off Dance of Death or A Matter of Life and Death prior to the 2010 tour. But the actual selection of songs and sequence of songs is just so off. It seems like they pretty much just went with the singles and "obvious" choices from those albums without any consideration given to flow or whether that selection of songs made for a good mix. I think the band has gotten a lot a better about integrating new material since then and would be curious to see how they would handle this kind of setlist today. I also don't know if I think it was a good idea in the first place to have an onslaught of 2010s era material anyway. I think there is a way to give new material proper attention while also not alienating the casual fans, which the band demonstrates on the Book of Souls, Legacy of the Beast, and even Future Past tours.

A Reunion-era set is a bit tougher to build (one should be carful), but if they do it now, they can do it better and with more and shorter material. They are great with them since 2016. The singles and some of the ''obvious'' choices were to expect for the 2010 tour, right. And for a new one too. The flow was nice, it just needed a couple of switches - like the 2022 tour.

The 2010 theme was a bit odd for an album tour (and using the same stage), but I think they did it because of the previous History tour and wanted a GME-type of tour again (not with a different stage). But for the Reunion era, a celebration (First Ten Years alike), or album tour with mostly newer songs.
I love the tour, but I really wanted to hear more TFF songs live. Since they played 6 hits in 2010, I guess they'll never do a full Reunion tour and the 2010 one was the closest. Unfortunately.

I would have dropped Wildest Dreams and No More Lies, replacing them with an 80s classic that maybe didn't get played in 2008/2009 and a different song off Dance of Death (something more energetic like Rainmaker). I also would have swapped Brave New World for something off AMOLAD since, again, Brave New World already had the most expansive North American tour of the reunion era and the title track also got some play on Give Me Ed. The setlist lacks a classic Harris epic (No More Lies and Blood Brothers aren't it) so that would have been a good spot for FTGGOG I think.
You could have also gotten away with 6 reunion era songs (Wicker Man, Ghost of the Navigator, Blood Brothers, Dance of Death, Breeg, Colours) + El Dorado and then three more classics to balance out the set. I like the idea of focusing more on new material but energy level is also important and the 2010 setlist doesn't have the same vibe as playing all of AMOLAD in 06 did.

I'm glad they didn't play more old songs in 2010 (even from SIT), the tour was unique because of that. 10 Reunion songs (4-3-2-1).
Brave New World is a Reunion classic, it was a given. They haven't played since. No More Lies was Steve's epic in the set (also they had chosen then Suns instead of Greater Good, expected kind of, even because of the theme; it made a great comeback in 2018, fitting, surprising and effective). AMOLAD with fewer songs because of the 2006 tour, I guess.

They dropped Suns after the first show because of the flow (and didn't replace it with a Reunion song!) - but I won't say the 2006 tour had a better flow than the 2010 one. Both had the ~same amount of hits.

They can play
The wickerman
Ghost of navigator
Brave new world
Wildest dreams
Dance of death
Brighter than 1000 suns
These colors dont run
longest day or for greater
El dorado
The talisman
If eternity should fail
Speed of light
Book of souls
Stratego
Writing on the wall
Hell on earth
I dont see a boring setlist

Ofc not boring, but the amount of long songs is tricky.

 

[Kalata]

I guess it still is a mystery if there is anything written yet but I think if not, they will write and record in 2027.

Written? Something new? Maybe not. Ideas, yes. From 2019, for sure. Write and record in 2027 at the latest, I would say. Who knows their plans yet, but next year they should start thinking about it, right.

 

[Helmuth Von Moltke]

It could be a good topic for the Maiden blasphemy thread, but being both a big fan of the reunion era and having seen the show myself in person (in addition to several bootlegs years after the fact), I think the 2010 setlist was kinda ill-conceived. It gets a lot of (well deserved) credit for giving the reunion era much needed attention, especially considering the last expansive tour they had done in North America for a new album had been Brave New World - most audiences had not heard a single song off Dance of Death or A Matter of Life and Death prior to the 2010 tour. But the actual selection of songs and sequence of songs is just so off. It seems like they pretty much just went with the singles and "obvious" choices from those albums without any consideration given to flow or whether that selection of songs made for a good mix. I think the band has gotten a lot a better about integrating new material since then and would be curious to see how they would handle this kind of setlist today. I also don't know if I think it was a good idea in the first place to have an onslaught of 2010s era material anyway. I think there is a way to give new material proper attention while also not alienating the casual fans, which the band demonstrates on the Book of Souls, Legacy of the Beast, and even Future Past tours.

I would have dropped Wildest Dreams and No More Lies, replacing them with an 80s classic that maybe didn't get played in 2008/2009 and a different song off Dance of Death (something more energetic like Rainmaker). I also would have swapped Brave New World for something off AMOLAD since, again, Brave New World already had the most expansive North American tour of the reunion era and the title track also got some play on Give Me Ed. The setlist lacks a classic Harris epic (No More Lies and Blood Brothers aren't it) so that would have been a good spot for FTGGOG I think.

You could have also gotten away with 6 reunion era songs (Wicker Man, Ghost of the Navigator, Blood Brothers, Dance of Death, Breeg, Colours) + El Dorado and then three more classics to balance out the set. I like the idea of focusing more on new material but energy level is also important and the 2010 setlist doesn't have the same vibe as playing all of AMOLAD in 06 did.

I agree with you. I also think Maiden has gotten much better over the reunion years in building impactful setlists.

Another example. They even learned from Give Me Ed Till I'm Dead, when they oddly opened the set with Number of the Beast, which just didn't work, and then played Hallowed so early in the set it was in broad daylight at festivals! From that in 2003, to the phenomenal set lists of Early Days or Somewhere Back in Time or Legacy of the Beast, which all flowed brilliantly.

But back to the 2010 set list. I really do agree. I love these albums and songs, I wish they'd have gotten a better set list for the one and only time a maiden tour was built around them.

I think Bruce having a bigger say over the set lists is a great thing. He did a great job with Legacy. I suspect he can see the bigger picture around flow and show better than Steve does these days. Just a hunch, no evidence.

 

[Mosh]

It seems like no coincidence that the setlists took a major step up starting on Book of Souls. Bruce's solo shows also suggest that he is more interested in doing deep cuts/being more experimental with the setlists. Not sure how the setlists were constructed prior to 2016, but the last three tours have at least shown more of a willingness to mix things up (lesser played 80s classics showing up on new album tours, Blaze/reunion era songs showing up on nostalgia tours). I'll be curious how this upcoming tour differs, if at all, from Early Days/SBIT/Maiden England in that way.

 

[Ruflux]

Since 2016 they've also been willing to not play every single hotly requested classic on every tour, which for a while it sure felt like they'd given up on, considering the impressive run 2MTM had until 2016 for example, with TETMD not that far behind. In a way I was shocked to see both continue their absence after 2022 which I figured would just be a one-off thing since they needed to fit the Senjutsu songs in somehow.

...which is also why I chose to temper my expectations for RFYL from the start, since it's a touring package designed around those classics after many of them haven't been played in years. That's the draw. Everything and the kitchen sink in terms of songs the casuals recognize.

 

[Mosh]

TFF 2011 was the prime example of this. With the exception of Dance of Death, which admittedly was a pleasant surprise that it carried over from 2010, that setlist was pretty unimaginative. I feel like 2016 Maiden would have chosen something instead of 2 Minutes that wasn't played on the SBIT tour.

 

[matic22]

It seems like no coincidence that the setlists took a major step up starting on Book of Souls. Bruce's solo shows also suggest that he is more interested in doing deep cuts/being more experimental with the setlists. Not sure how the setlists were constructed prior to 2016, but the last three tours have at least shown more of a willingness to mix things up (lesser played 80s classics showing up on new album tours, Blaze/reunion era songs showing up on nostalgia tours). I'll be curious how this upcoming tour differs, if at all, from Early Days/SBIT/Maiden England in that way.

I think with 2016, Bruce became involved with the setlists. Before that it was Steve with some input by the others. Since 2016, it's Bruce, Steve and Rod with some input by the others. Every tour since then featured a song, that Bruce mentioned before the tour he wants to sing again. 2016 it was COTD and Powerslave, 2018 it was Revelations and Icarus, 2023 it was Stranger In A Strange Land. 2025 it will probably be Rime and possibly Seventh Son.

Also, there were some lucky accidents like when the crew vetoed HCW as the closer and they subsequently picked Wasted Years, which works great.

 

[Mosh]

How much do we actually know about how setlists we’re made prior to 2016? That was the first time I can remember them revealing their process. I have a hard time believing Bruce didn’t always have a strong influence on the setlists, at least since the reunion, but assumed the difference in 2016 was that he was given more authority and maybe veto power.

It’s not like the formula changed all that much anyway. The 2016 setlist has 6 new songs including the opener, the single, the Harris epic, the Gers epic. The wild cards are the selection of lesser played 80s songs and closing with Wasted Years, things that I suspect came from Bruce.

I believe it was also confirmed somewhere that Bruce chose the Blaze songs for LOTB?

 

[matic22]

How much do we actually know about how setlists we’re made prior to 2016? That was the first time I can remember them revealing their process. I have a hard time believing Bruce didn’t always have a strong influence on the setlists, at least since the reunion, but assumed the difference in 2016 was that he was given more authority and maybe veto power.

It’s not like the formula changed all that much anyway. The 2016 setlist has 6 new songs including the opener, the single, the Harris epic, the Gers epic. The wild cards are the selection of lesser played 80s songs and closing with Wasted Years, things that I suspect came from Bruce.

I believe it was also confirmed somewhere that Bruce chose the Blaze songs for LOTB?

I strongly assume it was just Steve before 2016, with some adjustments by the others. I think Steve's influence can be indicated by the presence of The Evil That Men Do, which he often cites as one of Maiden's best songs. It was in most of the sets up until 2016 and it was featured only on 2/3 of LOTB.

AFAIK, Bruce has the veto power in case of a voting draw when choosing the setlist. That was most likely not the case before 2016, but it has happened at least once since.

I vaguely remember reading somewhere that Bruce chose SOTC for LOTB, but I'm not 100% on that one. I think it possibly picked itself when they were picking songs for the "religion" part of the set.

 

[dickinson1978]

I strongly assume it was just Steve before 2016, with some adjustments by the others. I think Steve's influence can be indicated by the presence of The Evil That Men Do, which he often cites as one of Maiden's best songs. It was in most of the sets up until 2016 and it was featured only on 2/3 of LOTB.

AFAIK, Bruce has the veto power in case of a voting draw when choosing the setlist. That was most likely not the case before 2016, but it has happened at least once since.

I vaguely remember reading somewhere that Bruce chose SOTC for LOTB, but I'm not 100% on that one. I think it possibly picked itself when they were picking songs for the "religion" part of the set.

i think Bruce came with the idea of the LOTB setlist.

 

[dickinson1978]

I think with 2016, Bruce became involved with the setlists. Before that it was Steve with some input by the others. Since 2016, it's Bruce, Steve and Rod with some input by the others. Every tour since then featured a song, that Bruce mentioned before the tour he wants to sing again. 2016 it was COTD and Powerslave, 2018 it was Revelations and Icarus, 2023 it was Stranger In A Strange Land. 2025 it will probably be Rime and possibly Seventh Son.

Also, there were some lucky accidents like when the crew vetoed HCW as the closer and they subsequently picked Wasted Years, which works great.

Rime bruce
And only the good die young steve?

 

[Kalata]

I also think Maiden has gotten much better over the reunion years in building impactful setlists.

Yeah, and not just the same classics as encores (2 Minutes, Evil, etc), for the most part.

Another example. They even learned from Give Me Ed Till I'm Dead, when they oddly opened the set with Number of the Beast, which just didn't work, and then played Hallowed so early in the set it was in broad daylight at festivals! From that in 2003, to the phenomenal set lists of Early Days or Somewhere Back in Time or Legacy of the Beast, which all flowed brilliantly.

They played Hallowed early before, in 1990. I think it was because of Bring Your Daughter. Number as an opener in 2003 was odd, but it was effective. Followed by Trooper! GME tour had a great set flow. It was like - first part, the 80's, second part, Reunion and Blaze song, plus the live favorites that they missed on the previous 2 tours.

I think Bruce having a bigger say over the set lists is a great thing. He did a great job with Legacy. I suspect he can see the bigger picture around flow and show better than Steve does these days. Just a hunch, no evidence.

Spot on.

It seems like no coincidence that the setlists took a major step up starting on Book of Souls. Bruce's solo shows also suggest that he is more interested in doing deep cuts/being more experimental with the setlists. Not sure how the setlists were constructed prior to 2016, but the last three tours have at least shown more of a willingness to mix things up (lesser played 80s classics showing up on new album tours, Blaze/reunion era songs showing up on nostalgia tours).

Since 2016 they've also been willing to not play every single hotly requested classic on every tour, which for a while it sure felt like they'd given up on, considering the impressive run 2MTM had until 2016 for example, with TETMD not that far behind. In a way I was shocked to see both continue their absence after 2022 which I figured would just be a one-off thing since they needed to fit the Senjutsu songs in somehow.
...which is also why I chose to temper my expectations for RFYL from the start, since it's a touring package designed around those classics after many of them haven't been played in years. That's the draw. Everything and the kitchen sink in terms of songs the casuals recognize.

This x2. We should be glad. I think it's because of Bruce, definitely. His solo tour also suggests that.

TFF 2011 was the prime example of this. With the exception of Dance of Death, which admittedly was a pleasant surprise that it carried over from 2010, that setlist was pretty unimaginative. I feel like 2016 Maiden would have chosen something instead of 2 Minutes that wasn't played on the SBIT tour.

2 Minutes wasn't played in 2010, so. But I agree, the 2011 setlist could have been bolder because of the 2010 and SBIT tours.

How much do we actually know about how setlists we’re made prior to 2016? That was the first time I can remember them revealing their process. I have a hard time believing Bruce didn’t always have a strong influence on the setlists, at least since the reunion, but assumed the difference in 2016 was that he was given more authority and maybe veto power.
It’s not like the formula changed all that much anyway. The 2016 setlist has 6 new songs including the opener, the single, the Harris epic, the Gers epic. The wild cards are the selection of lesser played 80s songs and closing with Wasted Years, things that I suspect came from Bruce.
I believe it was also confirmed somewhere that Bruce chose the Blaze songs for LOTB?

Agreed with all. Sign Of The Cross is one of Bruce's favorite songs, he said so last year.

I strongly assume it was just Steve before 2016, with some adjustments by the others. I think Steve's influence can be indicated by the presence of The Evil That Men Do, which he often cites as one of Maiden's best songs. It was in most of the sets up until 2016 and it was featured only on 2/3 of LOTB.
AFAIK, Bruce has the veto power in case of a voting draw when choosing the setlist. That was most likely not the case before 2016, but it has happened at least once since.

Before 2016, Steve (well said about Evil), Bruce (especially from the new albums), the others (for some, Nicko suggested Tears Of A Clown, but they didn't played his faves from SJ) and maybe Rod. And like Adrian mentioned, some songs are self-selected. Steve had chosen Greater Good in 2018.
Also, didn't Rod come up with DOD tour setlist? Bruce for SBIT tour?

I like to think Bruce also had a veto power in the past, although I doubt he wanted to sing The Red And The Black live.

Also, there were some lucky accidents like when the crew vetoed HCW as the closer and they subsequently picked Wasted Years, which works great.

I really wonder how Heaven Can Wait could have worked as a closer. Probably nice. And it would have made Wasted Years a unique closer for TFP.
They also had a thought of playing Brave New World back then, iirc.

i think Bruce came with the idea of the LOTB setlist.

Wasn't it Bruce, Steve and Rod? Or Bruce and Rod?

I'll be curious how this upcoming tour differs, if at all, from Early Days/SBIT/Maiden England in that way.

With at least 3 90's songs and 2 real deep cuts.

 

[Kalata]

Btw, with the next album tour (we all hope so) after this new Hits tour - I'm really curious how they'll approach the set, the stage (after the new one), the classics (maybe fresh again like for TFP; no Hills for sure), the amount of new songs, more surprises...

 

[GhostofCain]

Another example. They even learned from Give Me Ed Till I'm Dead, when they oddly opened the set with Number of the Beast, which just didn't work, and then played Hallowed so early in the set it was in broad daylight at festivals!

Other than opening with The Number of the Beast, the setlist on the Give Me Ed Til I'm Dead was superb and flowed really well.

 

[CA Bryers]

Let me preface this by saying yes, I know this means absolutely nothing. Yes, I was fishing for a scoop, and no, I'm not surprised no scoop was obtained. But kinda cool either way.

Tl;dr - Nicko's wife posting on Insta about new projects the two of them have coming up. I commented that I was hoping for Nicko's involvement in a new Maiden album. Nicko's wife "liked" it, The End. She probably "likes" most nice comments, so of course, that's no confirmation one of the projects between the two of them is a Maiden album.

But, kinda fun to put the idea out there and maybe have that idea mentioned to Nick. Then he calls up 'Arry, and goes, "Oy! This bloody git on Sweetpea's Instawhateveryoucallit's got a bleedin' point! When we gonna..." and so on...and we get a new Maiden album with Nicko on it.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

 

[TaaviMaiden]

I would just interpret it as her finding that a nice thought, which has nothing to do with whether something like that will happen.

 

[CA Bryers]

I would just interpret it as her finding that a nice thought, which has nothing to do with whether something like that will happen.

100% that is the case.