Bruce Dickinson a better singer in 1986 or 2016?

I definitely think the tour being spaced out a little better now has something to do with it, but I prefer Bruce live starting around 1998. Before then, his live voice was never consistent and he didn't seem to care as much about hitting the live notes well, or maybe he was just stressed from 5, 6 shows a week. Now, back to back shows are the oddity.

I seem to remember someone posted an interview once where he talked about how he started to take more and more care of his voice after leaving Maiden in 93. I think it shows.
 
His performance of Icarus in '83 in Dortmund is godly. So much frickin' power.

I was a bit bummed when I finally heard the 86/87 tour bootlegs as that was my favorite album/period. He was hit or miss on the chorus of CSIT on several of the shows, which was a drag because that was the opener! I thought he sounded really good live in '88.

But he's arguable one of the most consistent singers live now. I mean...the guy is nearing 60 and recovered from throat cancer and can still hit all of the notes night after night. Unreal.
 
I agree with the guys who tend to distinguish between studio albums and live performances. He was a much better studio singer back in the 80s (some of it being obviously the consequence of much harder work and more patience from the producer). Live, his performances in 1982 are just outstanding. After that, he had many mediocre nights (Live After Death being a perfect testimony), and I see the length of their tours as the main reason behind that. On the last couple of records, his voice is sometimes strained, but I agree that, live, he is often more consistent. If he ran a little less, he would be better (I come to see a band, not a sportsteam).
 
1986 wasn't a particularly strong year for Bruce, live and studio. I think his peak in the 80s came in 82-83 with Number of the Beast and Beast Over Hammersmith as great examples. I'd take 2016 over 1986 but not over 1982.

I think Bruce's vocal peak happened between 1997 and 2001, however.
 
Yeah, I saw them in Houston in 86 and he sounded good .. I remember thinking he really nailed Somewhere in Time at that show.
 
On their studio albums, Bruce sounds just as amazing now as he did in the 80's. Live, it's it's been up and down throughout Bruce's career. He sounds amazing on Beast On The Road and pretty good on the Piece Of Mind footage that's out there as well. He really struggled on Aces High on the Powerslave tour and was sick on a lot of the Somewhere In Time tour so he pretty much talked his way through Hallowed. He also said he was sick on Maiden England, but he still sounded pretty decent. On Skunkworks Live, Bruce sounds horrible on Meltdown. He completely screams it out and doesn't even sing it. When they did Aces High again on the last 2 history tours, it seemed like he was up and down on that one and could also no longer hold the long "whoa" type parts in Seventh Son. He also seemed to struggle a bit with The Final Frontier and The Talisman on that tour.
Death Or Glory also gave him a pretty hard time last year.
I think a lot of the reason is Maiden writes some songs that challenge Bruce and in the studio, you can record until you get it right and hit all the notes and when you combine all of it, Bruce has done quite an amazing job over the years.
 
Ace's High is an unfortunate one for Bruce because there really isn't any place you can put it in the setlist that would benefit his performance. As a show opener, he's never going to be fully warmed up at a level he can do it properly. They tried starting the encore with it on the Maiden England tour but by then he's probably pretty worn out. Putting it in the middle of the setlist (4th or 5th song where he would probably sound best) just doesn't work.
 
I thought he did a good job on the Flight 666 version (Aces High). Was very surprised and delighted that he sang the original high note melodies during the chorus parts (the "fly to live" bits).

But yeah - it's a highly demanding song that pushes Bruce's voice to its limit. Not only is the melody very high throughout the song, but it's so fast-paced and you need to be in good shape to give that song a good vocal performance!
 
Mosh said:
Ace's High is an unfortunate one for Bruce because there really isn't any place you can put it in the setlist that would benefit his performance. As a show opener, he's never going to be fully warmed up at a level he can do it properly. They tried starting the encore with it on the Maiden England tour but by then he's probably pretty worn out. Putting it in the middle of the setlist (4th or 5th song where he would probably sound best) just doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Plus what doesn't help matters is that Bruce was starting to show the (early) signs of his tongue and throat tumors on that 2013 leg - making his job that much harder.
 
Does anyone have an example of a 'crap' Bruce Maiden performance? Even when he's having an off night, his screw ups are pretty subtle to my ears...a truly terrible night would be something like Burton with Fear Factory every night (love FF, but boy does Burton suck live....like high school talent show suck).
 
I once showed that to my dad (he's a bit of a Maiden fan too) and mentioned it was the worst Hallowed Be Thy Name ever. He questioned it a bit at first, but once he heard it he said absolutely agreed.

Come to think of it, are there any other Iron Maiden performances that sound that bad? It just might be the bottom of the barrel, this.
 
There are some old Somewhere in Time tour vids of the title song that are quite terrible, but I couldn't seem to find them on YouTube and also they were recorded through tin cans.
 
MrKnickerbocker said:
There are some old Somewhere in Time tour vids of the title song that are quite terrible, but I couldn't seem to find them on YouTube and also they were recorded through tin cans.
Click to expand...

To be fair though, it seems like Bruce never figured out in the 80s how to get his voice prepared for gigs. On many bootlegs from 1982 through 1989, and even on Live After Death, his performance on the opening tracks is generally sub-par. He seems to warm up during the shows.
 
Perun said:
To be fair though, it seems like Bruce never figured out in the 80s how to get his voice prepared for gigs. On many bootlegs from 1982 through 1989, and even on Live After Death, his performance on the opening tracks is generally sub-par. He seems to warm up during the shows.
Click to expand...

Indeed. 82-89 might be considered the golden years by many fans, and the albums are sure great, but I think they are Bruce's weakest live years.
 
Bruce in the 80s was more concerned about the showmanship. Sometime in the 90s he learned that you can put on a great show while also delivering a great vocal performance.
 
Bruce single-handedly f*cks up LAD for me (one of the reasons I've never been that crazy about that album). His live performance improves with each decade. To be specific, it seems to me in the 80's he had a lot of potential, but he didn't know how to put it to good use. When his range decreased and singing became tougher for him, he learnt to really sing and make it seem as if he's really trying. IMHO, as usual.

The live performance is essential, because everyone, from Metallica to LaBrie to Avril can sound good in studio.
 
Probably the worst show that Bruce has ever done (Sheffield 1986). He had a bad flu.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top