Ah, alright, let's see, some negative things about Maiden:
Iron Maiden. Can't blame the guys for this one, they had a shit producer. Still a great album, but it could have been so much better!
Live After Death. Bruce sounds horrible. Want to talk a flat voice? That's where you find it. Sounds like he's been drinking acid (not surprisingly, considering the amount of shows they did on World Slavery!).
Seventh Son of a Seventh Son. Who needs guitaring when you can just use a LOT of synth? Bruce wails too much on songs here. The weakest studio album, in my opinion.
Fear of the Dark. I liked the punky groove of No Prayer For the Dying, but Fear of the Dark isn't really an album. It's a collection of stuff that Steve and Bruce had lying around. One of Maiden's worst songs (The Apparition) is on the album, and there's a fair few other weak ones (Fear is the Key, Chains of Misery, From Here to Eternity, Weekend Warrior) in my opinion. Some brilliant stuff, too, but some crap. Also, Bruce keeps up the punky voice while the guitars mostly get back into a more refined metal sound. That's not too cool!
A Real Live Dead One. Same stuff here. Overmastered, not enough crowd noise, guitars muted, etc, etc.
Virtual XI. A wee bit over produced. Some songs are repetitive (The Angel and the Gambler, Don't Look to the Eyes of a Stranger), but some songs are brilliant. The Clansman, in particular, is easily one of the 2 finest songs of Maiden's 1990s.
Brave New World. Not really a complaint, but seems to be missing a historical epic (although I am coming to REALLY love The Nomad, where before I thought it was just okay). Also, in places, some of the songs feel like they don't need the third guitar. They fixed that problem in Dance of Death, what an amazing album.
You'll notice how I haven't cursed at all. If you don't like Janick or Blaze, that's fine. But try not to just come out and call them down. I think you get a lot of feel in Blaze's voice (close your eyes and listen to Como Estais Amigos and listen there...that song is about men and women dying on an island thousands of miles from home, and about remembering their struggle while making peace) and I think Janick's solos can be pretty over the top. He does what he's good at, which you call repetitive. Well, listen to Adrian's solos, and listen to Dave's solos! They use a lot of the same manouvers in their works. H's solos on the Somewhere in Time album, in particular.
Blaze was with the band for 5 years. He can't hit the same high notes as Bruce, but he's got his own range, and he sings beautifully within it. It's when he tried to hammer those high notes that he flattens out. If people hadn't placed expectations on him to live up to Bruce, then maybe he wouldn't have sounded so flat, especially live. Also, to critique Steve, the band should've lowered their notes a bit, to fit Blaze's vocal range. Run to the Hills and Iron Maiden sound just fine a lil bit lower, guys.
If you can't hear the feeling in Blaze's voice, then I figure all you've listened to with him is The Angel and the Gambler. Listen to the spitting hatred in Virus; listen to the scathing criticism in 2 AM, the depression and hopelessness in The Aftermath, the pride and joy in The Clansman. Then pick up his solo stuff, and listen to songs like Silicon Messiah, Tenth Dimension, and Blood and Belief. If, after giving everything Blaze has done a fair listen, without saying "He's not Bruce Dickinson, fuck 'em", then I'll say you have the right to dislike him.
Does Maiden need three guitarists? No. Are they better with them? Yes. Listen to the harmony on songs like Paschendale, or Rainmaker. Three guitars, playing the same riff, all on different scales, or one guitar doing something wicked-awesome, and the other two harmonizing all over the place, and then there's stuff like Montségur, where it's just crazy, with the guitars flying. Songs like The Nomad and Brave New World would lose a lot without the third guitar.
If you want the "golden era" lineup, then listen to the golden era albums. There's about 6 of 'em. I don't want to see Maiden going back to the same old, same old, been there, done that, type thing. I don't want to see Maiden coming out with the same album they did in 1983, or 1984, or 1988, or even the same album from 2000 or 2003. I want a new album, with new sounds, new songs, new feelings, new subject, in 2006; I want to hear what Maiden's evolving into, not what they came from.
urple\']D A R K Shadow[/span]! If Maiden had've tried to make another album with Bruce, that feeling of animosity might have destroyed the band beyond repair.
--][img src=\'style_emoticons/[#EMO_DIR#]/wink.gif\' border=\'0\' style=\'vertical-align:middle\' alt=\'wink.gif\' /][!--endemo--]