2023 Tour Thread Confirmed and Speculated Dates

GhostofCain said:
And that was more than 30 years ago.

Rammstein, whether you like it or not (I have seen them live once, enjoyed the show yet found it somewhat puerile) are MILES ahead of Maiden in what a cutting edge show should look like these days.

If I may use the M word too, Metallica also are at a different level in terms of their live show.

I know, I know, someone would say that neither of them are at Maiden’s level musically, but Maiden are not at Therion’s musical level either.
Click to expand...
The thing with Maiden there stage show is stuck in 1988 in terms of production and looks quite outdated by todays standards especially anywhere outside of an arena.
Most bands are more cutting edge in that regard, but obviously musically Maiden are at another level compared to many
 
Ironalice said:
The thing with Maiden there stage show is stuck in 1988 in terms of production and looks quite outdated by todays standards especially anywhere outside of an arena.
Most bands are more cutting edge in that regard, but obviously musically Maiden are at another level compared to many
Click to expand...

They have been using the same stage set (i.e., the structure) since 2003. I bet Rod is happy on how the initial investment has worked out! :lol:
 
GhostofCain said:
And that was more than 30 years ago.

Rammstein, whether you like it or not (I have seen them live once, enjoyed the show yet found it somewhat puerile) are MILES ahead of Maiden in what a cutting edge show should look like these days.

If I may use the M word too, Metallica also are at a different level in terms of their live show.

I know, I know, someone would say that neither of them are at Maiden’s level musically, but Maiden are not at Therion’s musical level either.
Click to expand...
Ahh a kindred spirit.

I think Christopher is one of the two top music composers these days.
 
I actually don't think Metallica have a better stage show than Maiden at all. Sure they have giant video screens but usually with boring, visually unappealing graphics playing on them. Not to mention the general lack of theatricality. I'll take the pyro, walk-on Eddies and fabric backdrops any day of the week.
 
riff said:
I actually don't think Metallica have a better stage show than Maiden at all. Sure they have giant video screens but usually with boring, visually unappealing graphics playing on them. Not to mention the general lack of theatricality. I'll take the pyro, walk-on Eddies and fabric backdrops any day of the week.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I think they're a great live band and the stage show supports that rather well, but it's not exactly creative in that category. Hard comparison though, as their current stage show approach differs from Maiden's a lot.

That being said, I wouldn't mind if Maiden gave bit of a shake to the est. 2003 stage set structure anyway...
 
I agree that Metallica big screens are not creativ. But I think that their lights and flames are much more expensive than Maiden, at least it look like more expensive.

I prefer backdrops, but same stage set for 20 years is really boring. And Maiden can implement a lot of different worlds, Eddies and backstories like non other band in their stage desings and sets.
 
riff said:
It would be good if they could implement video technology in a way that doesn't sacrifice the handcrafted set look. Maybe smaller screens built into the areas either side of Nicko.
Click to expand...

Alternatively, I'd like to see more crafted, three-dimensional set pieces in the vein of Mayan towers and other details from TBOS stage set or the space station stuff from TFF tour; there is a little bit of that in LOTB too, mainly the pillars, but I think that kind of stuff could be a little bit more grandeur.
 
Metallica stage sucks big time. It's just screens.
Rammstein stage is big but overall I prefer Maiden's.

Also, Rammstein plays in stadiums only, skipping countries where they can't fill one. Maiden plays basically everywhere, so they have to do arenas too.
 
I like what Mastodon are doing with their live shows, very powerful. But more than anything, I want to see the guys play and don't really care much for effects like flames or Eddies; I know I'm in the minority.
As for the bands that people mention: Metallica are really, really great on their albums. But live? Saw them twice, no comparison to Maiden IMO. Have seen Rammstein live from "over the fence" (I'd never pay to see them) but left after 15 min. Their sound was perfect, but sterile to the max; I mean, how many playback tracks can you use with a straight face?
 
GhostofCain said:
Metallica also are at a different level in terms of their live show.
Click to expand...

Saw both bands on their latest tours, Metallica certainly had a bigger, trendier stage, but the theatre from Maiden was far, far better. I was particularly disappointed by One, where all you could see during the song, was smoke and video clips of legs marching. Not a patch on the theatre and mood of Sign of the Cross on the LOTB tour.

Maiden strike the correct balance between stage gimmickry/antics and not letting them over shadow the music, and always have done.
 
GhostofCain said:
but Maiden are not at Therion’s musical level either.
Click to expand...
Wow.
Ironalice said:
The thing with Maiden there stage show is stuck in 1988 in terms of production and looks quite outdated by todays standards especially anywhere outside of an arena.
but obviously musically Maiden are at another level compared to many
Click to expand...
I don't agree with your first comment (LOTB tour says hello..., for example). And why should every ''modern thing'' (modern stage set) be better than something from the past. For example, the stage sets of Metallica are really shallow (and they can certainly afford better), but I don't think they can touch the stage sets of the bands from the 80's! Few can. I agree with your second comment.
The_7th_one said:
I would say that 1988 stage has been far better than what they had after that
Click to expand...
LOTB and TBOS stage sets?
Randalf said:
That being said, I wouldn't mind if Maiden gave bit of a shake to the est. 2003 stage set structure anyway...
Click to expand...
You mean like the VXI stage set shape? It could work. The towers from recent tours are really cool.
gazda said:
I agree that Metallica big screens are not creativ. But I think that their lights and flames are much more expensive than Maiden, at least it look like more expensive.

I prefer backdrops, but same stage set for 20 years is really boring. And Maiden can implement a lot of different worlds, Eddies and backstories like non other band in their stage desings and sets.
Click to expand...
The lights show of Maiden is always great. And how many times do they have to use flames during a concert? It would be dull imo. Maiden stage sets are never boring. I think they've been the same since 2003 because the backdrops are a major part of their stage presentation.
 
LOTB is cool and all and certainly a better stage show than Metallica's is (they've long been pretty hesitant to use pyro for example) with all the changing realms, the inflatables and the moody lighting. A lot of that's been diminished on this leg because of the inclusion of that Senjutsu "realm" and mostly playing outdoors in the European summer, which is where the set is really rough due to its small size and heavy reliance on lighting to set the mood.

I think that's where the idea comes from that a band of Maiden's stature could and should invest in being able to scale up the show for the stadium gigs. Metallica for example has two completely different stages for arena and stadium tours. The only reason Maiden doesn't is presumably because they want to mix-and-match stadium and arena shows in one leg because that's more cost-effective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top