Bruce Dickinson - What Does This Button Do?

srfc said:
Steve has mentioned this quite a lot, sometimes he's a bit more diplomatic and names no names about who he is talking about, but that seems pretty clear.

Also, Doug Sampson was a good mate of Steve's and I've seen Steve mention before about being heart broken about having to give Doug the boot, so I'd find it very hard to believe that he'd want to replace him with the guy described in the above quote.
Click to expand...

Thunderstick described the rehearsal they did when Steve wanted him back in 1980. It's the truth. I just can't find the interview. Steve did not want the Thunderstick persona, pure and simple. They already had Eddie.
 
srfc said:
Steve has mentioned this quite a lot, sometimes he's a bit more diplomatic and names no names about who he is talking about, but that seems pretty clear.

Also, Doug Sampson was a good mate of Steve's and I've seen Steve mention before about being heart broken about having to give Doug the boot, so I'd find it very hard to believe that he'd want to replace him with the guy described in the above quote.
Click to expand...
From the account given in "Run to the Hills" (again!) I didn't get the impression that Doug was "given the boot", I though he walked voluntarily on the grounds that his health was already not up to their schedule (ie before they were signed) and he knew it was only going to get worse as they became more successful. I can see that Steve might well be heartbroken to see him go though.
 
We were talking genuinely and regularly to Bruce on the phone and he was getting a bit disillusioned with his own solo project
Click to expand...

The only thing that could be related to disillusion is the fact that TCW crew still played clubs in USA and Europe. Dickinson-Samson would draw more people than Dickinson-Smith? Now that's a disillusion. About playing gigs with Samson, why not, Bruce did collaborate left and right in those years.
 
Samson wasn’t very good to begin with. Even if Bruce hadn’t joined Maiden he would’ve probably been signed as a solo artist or joined a band with musicians who were at his level.

But that’s just conjecture. :innocent:
 
I think in the Maiden V Samson battle there was only one winner. I dont think personally that Samson were ever destined for the heights of Maiden but if nothing else... we got Bruce :)
 
Last edited:
Mosh said:
Samson wasn’t very good to begin with. :innocent:
Click to expand...

Your personal opinion, just an opinion. From "Survivors" to "Joint Forces", all albums were masterpieces. And even beyond that, they did great albums anyway. Paul Samson just mixed hard rock with blues. He was doing his thing, like it or not.

There is no "Samson vs Maiden" debate. They are two very very very different bands with vastly different talents at play.

And yes, the musicians in Samson were 100% amazing. All of them. But you're free to see things differently, of course.
 
Thunderstick Lives! said:
Your personal opinion, just an opinion. From "Survivors" to "Joint Forces", all albums were masterpieces.
Click to expand...

Dark Side of the Moon is often labeled as masterpiece of prog rock, The Number of The Beast (or Paranoid/Master of Puppets) masterpieces of heavy metal. I am not aware that Samson's albums are being deemed masterpieces in hard rock circles. Opinions are like arses, sure, but those "masterpiece" labels have their reasoning rooted behind majority opinions, impact, and longevity in terms of relevance. How many successful hard rock or metal acts cite Samson as one of the strong influences? There are several generations of successful bands that cite Maiden like this.

I consider two Dickinson/Z/Smith albums better than 99.9% of hard rock and metal out there. I would never try to justify my personal preferences the way you do with yours and Samson. Keep it real dude - Samson never truly made it big. They may have had the potential.
 
Zare said:
Dark Side of the Moon is often labeled as masterpiece of prog rock, The Number of The Beast (or Paranoid/Master of Puppets) masterpieces of heavy metal. I am not aware that Samson's albums are being deemed masterpieces in hard rock circles. Opinions are like arses, sure, but those "masterpiece" labels have their reasoning rooted behind majority opinions, impact, and longevity in terms of relevance. How many successful hard rock or metal acts cite Samson as one of the strong influences? There are several generations of successful bands that cite Maiden like this.

I consider two Dickinson/Z/Smith albums better than 99.9% of hard rock and metal out there. I would never try to justify my personal preferences the way you do with yours and Samson. Keep it real dude - Samson never truly made it big. They may have had the potential.
Click to expand...

There are various degree to the term "masterpiece", sure as hell. "The Number of the Beast" will never be regarded as an universal masterpiece the same way "Dark Side of Moon" is by almost anyone in the world. There are different degrees and levels. Different leagues, if you want.

Paul Samson managed to mix blues with metal and punk in "Survivors" (1979) and the following two albums. "Head on" is regarded as a classic by many. They helped starting the movement and defining its rules and parameters. And then, Nicky Moore - a living legend - became the main vocalist of the band after Bruce Bruce's demise, and they made two brilliant records.

They were vastly different from Maiden, and vice versa (no pun intended).

Again, there's no need to compare Samson with Maiden. Can you compare "The Evil Dead" with "Shining"? Both are masterpieces in their own way.

And the "majority" didn't even know how great was "The Evil Dead" until the raise of Internet. This way, a cult movie can become a mainstream hit.


Anyway... we were talking about Bruce's book and why he does like to "bash" Samson when there's no real need for that --- they put him on the map and treated him like a brother.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top