Bruce Dickinson a better singer in 1986 or 2016?
- Thread starter onemanmambo
- Start date
desultory
1-2-3-compassion
Finally someone makes some sense in this thread.
CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
Judas only stated his opinion in regards to Bruce's voice. I don't think he said anything about the rest of the band's performance.
Are you sure you aren't conflating the historical importance of the release (in, say, the 80's) with the actual performance of Bruce?
You're in danger of confusing your own opinion with objective fact here, Foro.
Opinion.
As defined by who? By music critics? In the 80's?
A fairly narrow selection viewing this from 2016.
Bruce's performance is "wonderful"?
Opinion.
Did someone say DotR was superior?
Are you sure you aren't conflating the historical importance of the release (in, say, the 80's) with the actual performance of Bruce?
I largely agree with your post, Cried, but I feel the need to remark on two points:
LAD indeed is generally hailed to be one of the best heavy metal live albums from the 80's to this day. Most music critics and casual Maiden fans would agree here. You find it on a lot of top lists on this topic, while all other live albums by Maiden are usually absent. You can't quantify this sort of data, it's more the personal experience. I don't think it's their best live album, but I'm a Maiden die-hard. I think Foro was applying a more general view here. Whether it's a valid argument against Judas' opinion is a different question.
By the standard of 1985 it wasn't, and that's the only standard we should apply here. Of course it's fair to prefer Rock in Rio because it has Brave New World on it, or En Vivo! for Coming Home for instance, but it's unfair to consider the list of songs a flaw from a 2016 perspective.
LAD indeed is generally hailed to be one of the best heavy metal live albums from the 80's to this day. Most music critics and casual Maiden fans would agree here. You find it on a lot of top lists on this topic, while all other live albums by Maiden are usually absent. You can't quantify this sort of data, it's more the personal experience. I don't think it's their best live album, but I'm a Maiden die-hard. I think Foro was applying a more general view here. Whether it's a valid argument against Judas' opinion is a different question.
By the standard of 1985 it wasn't, and that's the only standard we should apply here. Of course it's fair to prefer Rock in Rio because it has Brave New World on it, or En Vivo! for Coming Home for instance, but it's unfair to consider the list of songs a flaw from a 2016 perspective.
CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
This is my exact point; "one of the best heavy metal live albums from the 80's" is quite a narrow, caveat-filled definition. How does is stack up in comparison to other live albums, period? This is 2016; I feel we should be moving beyond the "critics rate this..." label & be far more critical of this analysis & conclusion if it's still being made today.
Should we? I'm just saying, it's hardly representative of Maiden now. And I'm pretty sure Judas is forming his opinion having taken a far wider view of the albums merits in the context of Maiden in 2016. The topic is, after all, comparing Bruce's voice then & now.
I don't consider the lack of inclusion of songs that didn't exist in the 80's a flaw. I'm simply pointing out that the selection is only "wonderful", to me, if I were standing in the 80's discussing this. I don't consider the selection wonderful now.
Perhaps, but that doesn't mean that LAD isn't rated highly by fans and critics to this day. As I said - whether that is a valid argument to make in this context is a different question. But it doesn't change the truth of the statement in and by itself. If you want to address the validity of the argument in this context, questioning its truth isn't the right way to go about it, IMHO.
That is indeed the topic of the thread, but the discussion has diverted from it. If the topic is someone saying they dislike LAD because of Bruce's performance on it, the selection of songs as it compares to our view today is irrelevant. And that's how I took yours and Foro's statement. I admit that "wonderful collection of songs" could just be a poetic way of describing the album as a whole, but I'm not going to interpret Foro's words if he can speak for himself.
Just to be clear, I'm not arguing here whether LAD is or is not a bad album, I'm pointing out the logical flaws in your argumentation, which I think is a fair thing to do if you're doing the same to Foro.
CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
I think it's pretty obvious what point I'm making. I'm stating this to be at best an irrelivant piece of information; and at worst, pure nonsense. Besides, Foro brought it up, not me. I'm saying: what of it? It's just a soundbite to me.
Yip, but I'm trying to discuss this in context. Foro appears to be criticising a perfectly valid opinion with illogical argument...
Judas: I don't like LaD because Bruce's singing isn't that good.
Foro: IT'S HIGHLY RATED BY CRITICS AND CASUAL FANS!
Uh.
That's... exactly what Judas said & what we're discussing.
Again, Foro brought it up. I'm just putting the point in context. We're not in the 80's.
Where is that rascal?!
Flaws? Pff. Just to be clear, the fact that it's my day off isn't the reason I'm continuing this discussion...Just to be clear, I'm not arguing here whether LAD is or is not a bad album, I'm pointing out the logical flaws in your argumentation, which I think is a fair thing to do if you're doing the same to Foro.
MrKnickerbocker
clap hands
I don't really care about "facts", historical importance, or hype: I don't listen to Live After Death because I think Bruce's performance is poor.
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
You're not even listening to this album? Here follows my opinion: you're ignoring a lot of good stuff.
Thanks Perun you pointed out that the album is still widely regarded as one of the most highly acclaimed live albums. That's not for nothing. The singing is good enough to give this album its high rating by both fans and critics. A handful of you may have your own opinion but you may also question your own intolerance for Bruce's voice. He is one of five guys. The album has a lot of instrumental time. And is he THAT terrible to disregard the album? I think, here another opinion, that this is a disproportional thing to do if you value that era and its exciting live performances that belong with it.
Thanks Perun you pointed out that the album is still widely regarded as one of the most highly acclaimed live albums. That's not for nothing. The singing is good enough to give this album its high rating by both fans and critics. A handful of you may have your own opinion but you may also question your own intolerance for Bruce's voice. He is one of five guys. The album has a lot of instrumental time. And is he THAT terrible to disregard the album? I think, here another opinion, that this is a disproportional thing to do if you value that era and its exciting live performances that belong with it.
Last edited:
But would the album still be as highly regarded if it wasn't the only live album released in the 80s (not counting Maiden England, which came later)? I reckon for many fans this was their first taste of live Maiden. Lets face it, any Maiden live recording is going to be exciting if you haven't experienced it yourself yet.
We have so many live albums now I think it's perfectly justified to ignore one (or more) of them based solely on the vocal performance. Especially in the case of LAD, we have Flight 666 which has most of the same songs and better performances from Bruce.
We have so many live albums now I think it's perfectly justified to ignore one (or more) of them based solely on the vocal performance. Especially in the case of LAD, we have Flight 666 which has most of the same songs and better performances from Bruce.
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
I bet that LAD is still widely regarded as highly regarded. How ever cool and good sounding Flight 666 was, and however a great alternative it presents (esp. Rime is great as well), it does not overrule LAD. Bruce might be perceived as better, I wouldn't let that criterium make the whole album better.
MrKnickerbocker
clap hands
I have listened to it, many hundreds of times. However, since discovering their other live albums, I find that I never, ever choose to listen to a LAD version when I have so many more to choose from that have better (as I perceive it) performances. I have stated this over and over again on the forum: if the vocals aren't up to par, I do not care how good the instrumental sections. Sorry, my primary musical enjoyment comes from vocals. I love instrumental music, but if you put a bad vocal over it: I no longer like it.
Do I perceive Bruce's LAD performance to be "THAT terrible" in the grand scheme of things - no. But it's certainly his worst overall performance on a professionally released live album. Thus, why would I listen to that as a first option when there are better options available?
LAD is a case of it being a historic record with tons of energy at the height of the band's early career. It is seen as a great record because of historical importance, emotional attachment (I'm willing to bet most diehard Maiden fans were in their late adolscence-early 20's when it came out), the grandeur of the production, and, yes, the energy the band is pumping out. Bruce is flaming with gusto throughout the whole thing, as is the rest of the band, but his voice is tired. I simply do not care if something is "widely regarded as one of the most highly acclaimed live albums" if a different album has better sound.
I understand that LAD is unparalleled in terms of importance, but it is surpassed in quality by most other Maiden live recordings because of Bruce's performance.
CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
Why do you keep parroting this out? People & critics like it; therefore they must be right. Where's your critical judgement man? "Most highly acclaimed live albums", what ever? In Metal only? Maybe you guys could supply some evidence for this claim. Blabbermouth maybe?
"Good enough", your words. That would be not very good then?
Talk about following the flock. We're only saying Bruce doesn't sound that shit hot.
Straw man argument. Who said they disregarded it?
So not very objective then.
Exactly.
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
Knick, this is probably painful to do but maybe you know by heart: Do you have a top 10 or 5 of Bad Bruce moments on LAD? I want to know what I think about these moments.
Sorry Cried, but this way of arguing is tiring and it doesn't get us anywhere. If you TRULY don't understand how or disagree with the way I look at it, point it out. If you don't believe that LAD is so acclaimed, I can't help it. If you don't believe me, I can't help it. I am not going to show how great Tolkien's Lord of the Rings is. It just is to most, if they like fantasy literature. That's LAD to a metal audience. Just look it up yourself. If you care. Because, and damned if you do, I think you do not care. Command your dog and bark yourself.
Sorry Cried, but this way of arguing is tiring and it doesn't get us anywhere. If you TRULY don't understand how or disagree with the way I look at it, point it out. If you don't believe that LAD is so acclaimed, I can't help it. If you don't believe me, I can't help it. I am not going to show how great Tolkien's Lord of the Rings is. It just is to most, if they like fantasy literature. That's LAD to a metal audience. Just look it up yourself. If you care. Because, and damned if you do, I think you do not care. Command your dog and bark yourself.
Last edited:
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
Well, I am not inclined to agree, especially not with your last seven words. I'm not eager to say why. At this moment, I'm full of not very objective opinions, narrow, caveat-filled definitions and straw man arguments. Also, I'm saying things others haven't said! Whoa, that's unheard of, isn't it?
MrKnickerbocker
clap hands
I definitely do not. I'll find them and eventually get back to you with specifics, but it'll be awhile.
CriedWhenBrucieLeft
Meme Only Account
I'm saying apply the same level of scrutiny to this that you apply to everything else (on this forum); you don't appear to be. I'm not denying that "music critics & casual fans" think this is the bees-knees; I'm saying, do you think this is an informed opinion? I do not. I think this was rightly praised at the time and for a time afterwords. I now think people & critics name-drop it without having reassessed their opinion of its merits; in light of later live releases, by Maiden and other bands, and 30 years of further Maiden discography history. If you still hold this in high regard, then fine, state this. Don't use this "widely regarded" argument as if it carries weight though. I'm interested in your opinion, not some nameless uninformed think-Run-to-the-Hills-equals-Maiden wider public.
This is all besides the point anyway. The main point is, as plenty of others have pointed out, that Bruce wasn't on top form. If he was in better form elsewhere, and the band likewise were, then that recording should be held up as the live Maiden album. LaD should not be put on this pedestal you're trying to put it on.
Last edited: