19 years ago today

I don't think we have active members from 2002, and I am curious to see the oldest topics from 2002. :)

Big chance it started back then indeed. The active members who are here the longest came here in 2003. And indeed it's possible that we have members from 15/16 years old(?)

(Well, my son is a member who is way younger, but he's hardly active and can't remember nor retrieve his password)
 
I joined this forum back in 2003, but had been on the official one since before the reunion and a member of Jer's Strange Death list at around that time too.

Does this mean anything? Yes, it does: I am an old fart. :lol:
 
Guns N Roses were a much bigger band than Maiden in their heyday so therefore it's no surprise that their reunion tour was much bigger than Maiden's

I might be alone in thinking this, but Guns N'Roses are probably the most overrated hard rock band of all time. :D

Back to topic: I raise a Trooper to Maiden's reunion. If someone would have told me back in 1998 that I would have seen the band live more than 30 times, playing most of my favourite songs that I thought I would never see played live, whilst releasing albums with a quality that rivals those from their 80s heyday, I would have thought they were pulling my leg!
 
Really comparing Maiden to G'n'R is pointless because the latter is way more akin to Aerosmith ffs. Guns are a rock and roll band, they were as successful as Maiden in their respective genre, which is a lot bigger and more exposed through mainstream than metal and hence bigger numbers on their side. It is that simple. Guns aren't metal.
 
You missed my point. I was stating that the Iron Maiden reunion was not an instant success. I could have compared with the Spice Girls reunion and the argument would still be valid, The EdHuntour was not excactly an overwelming return. Instead they grew slowly. Besides, songs like Wasted Years are way more commercial than anything GNR ever released. With the Iron Maiden chart success, how would Iron Maiden not be mainstream nowadays. How do you define mainstream anyway?



What's your point? :)


I would totally disagree with this. The Maiden reunion was successful from the get go and didn’t build into success at all. Yes over time that success grew bigger but the announcement of Dickinson and Smithscreturn was an instant jolt. I went to see the band on the end hubter tour, Paris and Rotterdam and both venues were an immediate step up capacity wise to what they had been playing in the blaze years. Plus they were packed to the rafters.

The metal community was falling over themselves in the stampede to see the classic line up reunited. This was big news and a big success. I’d say the success got bigger as the reunion went on but it was still an immediate success.
 
I would totally disagree with this. The Maiden reunion was successful from the get go and didn’t build into success at all. Yes over time that success grew bigger but the announcement of Dickinson and Smithscreturn was an instant jolt. I went to see the band on the end hubter tour, Paris and Rotterdam and both venues were an immediate step up capacity wise to what they had been playing in the blaze years. Plus they were packed to the rafters.

The metal community was falling over themselves in the stampede to see the classic line up reunited. This was big news and a big success. I’d say the success got bigger as the reunion went on but it was still an immediate success.

The attendence numbers were higher compared to VXIWT but not that much higher. My parents took me to see them in Boston while we visited relatives, it was my second time seeing them. Orpheum Theatre was the venue (Yes, one of the shows Adrian missed), I’ve seen many bands there, I think it takes like 2000-3000 people. To say it a success and that ”The metal community was falling over themselves in the stampede” is not how I remember it that night in Boston. Just compare the attendence between the tours. In the US they still played smaller venues. But BNW, about then it really took off.
 
Last edited:
I would totally disagree with this. The Maiden reunion was successful from the get go and didn’t build into success at all. Yes over time that success grew bigger but the announcement of Dickinson and Smithscreturn was an instant jolt. I went to see the band on the end hubter tour, Paris and Rotterdam and both venues were an immediate step up capacity wise to what they had been playing in the blaze years. Plus they were packed to the rafters.

The metal community was falling over themselves in the stampede to see the classic line up reunited. This was big news and a big success. I’d say the success got bigger as the reunion went on but it was still an immediate success.

What metal community? In 1999 metal community was full of nu and hardcore people who didn't actually care much about Maiden at all. Yes in your circle people rejoiced but that's your circle. Where I went out, dozens of metalheads, in that times, and Maiden wasn't universally acclaimed at all. You had people hooked on Soulfly who didn't care about the old stuff nor about old guys reunion.

It took a while for Maiden to rejuvenate its audience.
 
I think the biggest rally from the metal community came in the build-up to the Brave New World album for sure. The news about Bruce returning in 1999 hit a lot of fans but the Ed Huntour went over the heads of many since it was such a short tour and not that well advertised. When the promotion for the Brave New World album started - "Brand new album from Iron Maiden, feat. the return of Bruce Dickinson and Adrian Smith"etc even more fans/people started to realize that Maiden had reformed and then the hype really started to build. A lot of the hype also payed off big time with a lot of big promoters booking Maiden for huge festivals on the Brave New World tour purely because it was the "return of Iron Maiden" and they wanted to host that spectacle....They would never have played those big festivals/shows if Blaze had stayed in the band and this was just another tour...And I think on the Brave New World tour was when they started winning back a lot of fans.
 
Last edited:
This was a weird time for me. I didnt get what was going on, even though my dad always talked about Bruce coming back. On the Virtual XI tour I saw them at Hovet, a venue which takes 8000 people that they sold out. My next show was in Boston. Attendence in Boston 1999 was 3000. Very different markets of course, but those were my first shows. The only song I knew at the time was Angel and the Gambler, because I was 9 and liked the video..

Later in 1999, Maiden played Globen which takes far more than Hovet, about twice as much. But I never understood how huge the band was until I saw the band in Globen 2006, 3 sold out shows playing a new album! Talk about success.
 
(Well, my son is a member who is way younger, but he's hardly active and can't remember nor retrieve his password)

Son, you're a man, no longer a boy. We have invested into your future. Another father would give you a gold watch. I am giving you a 15 year old, verified, like and karma filled maidenfans.com account. My son, may you never forget your password!
 
What metal community? In 1999 metal community was full of nu and hardcore people who didn't actually care much about Maiden at all. Yes in your circle people rejoiced but that's your circle. Where I went out, dozens of metalheads, in that times, and Maiden wasn't universally acclaimed at all. You had people hooked on Soulfly who didn't care about the old stuff nor about old guys reunion.

It took a while for Maiden to rejuvenate its audience.

The press started to build/hype around Maiden again when Bruce came back in the fold. Iron Maiden became a regular feature in for example Kerrang again during those years 1999/2000 (a magazine that had sort of forgotten about Maiden when Blaze was there)....Here's a front cover of Maiden and Slipknot for example from the year 2000. Building up Maiden again for a new younger audience! ;)

s-l1600.jpg
 
Bruce and Steve look so uncomfortable. Bruce isn't even trying to hide his discomfort.

And that AC/DC poster in the corner was re-used by Kerrang a few years later.
 
I'm guessing the late 90s Metal "community" was dominated by Pantera, Korn, Metallica and Soulfly right?

At least where I am. Sepultura, Deftones, Machine Head were among the common picks too. Extreme metal had a lot of popularity, black and death. If I recall talks with people from back then, we're talking at least 50 different metalheads, heavy metal wouldn't even be a top category and Maiden wouldn't have a significant lead in it.

Iron Maiden weren't universally acclaimed throughout the metal board back then. This extreme/hardcore/nu local people that weren't into HM and had negative opinion of Maiden in late 1990s still weren't into HM or Maiden in 2008, but they had massive respect for what the band has done.

From my subjective experience back then, there was more appreciation for Maiden inside extreme sports circles such as skaters and bikers and inside moto clubs than in the metalhead circle.

I live in a mid sized city by euro standards, 90% of the high schools are located in just three neighborhoods, there were just 4 or 5 spots to hang outside in the city. You know metalheads use outfits for easy ally recognition and it is only natural to hang at the same spots...So I think for my location, the statistic sampling is legit.
 
Yeah, interesting also that it's Slipknot meet Maiden and not the other way around. Kinda proving that Slipknot in 2000 were way more popular than Maiden at the time at least among the Kerrang readers. But I'm sure quite a lot of young Slipknot fans sought Maiden out and probably listened to The Number of The Beast or Powerslave after hearing Clown or Corey from Slipknot telling their fans how much they grew up on Maiden etc....I'm sure this gained Maiden quite a lot of new fans.
 
The press started to build/hype around Maiden again when Bruce came back in the fold.

Of course it did. Kerrang has an agenda just like Sounds had. It was an easy bet to be optimistic because of a proven Dickinson (and Smith) form.
 
Yeah, interesting also that it's Slipknot meet Maiden and not the other way around. Kinda proving that Slipknot in 2000 were way more popular than Maiden at the time at least among the Kerrang readers. But I'm sure quite a lot of young Slipknot fans sought Maiden out and probably listened to a few of the 80s albums after hearing Clown or Corey from Slipknot telling their fans how much they grew up on Maiden etc....I'm sure this gained Maiden quite a lot of new fans.
I got into Maiden through a copy of Kerrang in 2005. 'The essential guide to Iron Maiden' or something like that. Before that I was a fan of Linkin Park, Funeral for a Friend, Avenged Sevenfold and Trivium - perfect Kerrang fodder at the time.
At least where I am. Sepultura, Deftones, Machine Head were among the common picks too. Extreme metal had a lot of popularity, black and death. If I recall talks with people from back then, we're talking at least 50 different metalheads, heavy metal wouldn't even be a top category and Maiden wouldn't have a significant lead in it.

Iron Maiden weren't universally acclaimed throughout the metal board back then. This extreme/hardcore/nu local people that weren't into HM and had negative opinion of Maiden in late 1990s still weren't into HM or Maiden in 2008, but they had massive respect for what the band has done.

From my subjective experience back then, there was more appreciation for Maiden inside extreme sports circles such as skaters and bikers and inside moto clubs than in the metalhead circle.

I live in a mid sized city by euro standards, 90% of the high schools are located in just three neighborhoods, there were just 4 or 5 spots to hang outside in the city. You know metalheads use outfits for easy ally recognition and it is only natural to hang at the same spots...So I think for my location, the statistic sampling is legit.
Ah yes, Deftones and Machine Head. Sepultura's downward trajectory must have been in full swing by 1999 though. Their music stabilized again once Igor Cavalera left actually and they've released a few good albums over the last 10 years. The Sepultura name had its 15 minutes of fame in the mid-90s though. Right band at the right time to make waves in the mainstream, but they lost all that when Max quit.

I don't fully understand the end of your post Zare. What exactly was your sampling statistic?
 
Back
Top