Does Maiden care anymore?

OK, serious, sarcasm-free answer this time.

Iron Maiden doesn't care about a lot of things. They don't care about remaking their old albums. They don't care about re-recording Blaze material. They don't care about producing albums that sound like the albums they produced in the 1980s. They don't care about the amount of money they could probably make by relying on the legacy of their "classic" albums.

The band doesn't care what fans who only want them to Play Classics think. Iron Maiden doesn't care about their past.

They market it, sure, and play the songs, but they don't care to let it define them. So in this aspect, yes, they don't care.

Iron Maiden does care about a lot more things. They care about putting together albums that have new sounds, and about evolving. They care about not becoming a cabaret act, full of self parody like bands like AC/DC. Iron Maiden cares about their fans, and cares enough to bring their more limited tour dates to different areas of the world. They care about how they sound as a live band, and making sure that the album they put out reflects the way they're able to sound on stage. They care about the fans who like what they're doing now.

In short, Iron Maiden cares about their future. They care about this album and the next album, and maybe even the one after that.
 
LooseCannon said:
OK, serious, sarcasm-free answer this time.

Iron Maiden doesn't care about a lot of things. They don't care about remaking their old albums. They don't care about re-recording Blaze material. They don't care about producing albums that sound like the albums they produced in the 1980s. They don't care about the amount of money they could probably make by relying on the legacy of their "classic" albums.

The band doesn't care what fans who only want them to Play Classics think. Iron Maiden doesn't care about their past.

They market it, sure, and play the songs, but they don't care to let it define them. So in this aspect, yes, they don't care.

Iron Maiden does care about a lot more things. They care about putting together albums that have new sounds, and about evolving. They care about not becoming a cabaret act, full of self parody like bands like AC/DC. Iron Maiden cares about their fans, and cares enough to bring their more limited tour dates to different areas of the world. They care about how they sound as a live band, and making sure that the album they put out reflects the way they're able to sound on stage. They care about the fans who like what they're doing now.

In short, Iron Maiden cares about their future. They care about this album and the next album, and maybe even the one after that.
Click to expand...

#EndOfThread
 
I think if they didn't care they wouldn't be doing it, I mean they don't need the money. As for the sound, the last great sound they had was on Brave New World maybe Dance of Death, they have been getting rawer since, I don't think it's a bad thing, Somewhere in Time & Seventh Son... were very polished & it was a breath of fresh air when they went back to a raw sound on No Prayer, like back to the early stuff.
 
Good morning/afternoon/evening (depending on where you are in the world)

This is my first post on this forum but have been around for a good few months now reading various threads. I find this forum to be a great source of info and it's a genuine pleasure reading a forum where a) people seem very knowledgeable about the subject at hand and b) people generally interact with a great deal of respect to each other.

Won't post a long intro about me but I will say I'm from Essex in England and maiden have been my favourite band since discovering SSOASS back in 1990. Fear of the Dark was the first new released album since I became a fan and luckily I've not missed a single tour since my first maiden gig which was with Blaze on the x-factour, so that's a fair few concerts I've been to :)

What prompted me to make this my first post was after reading through this interesting thread I noticed something that I have noticed a lot on this forum and its regarding the bands sound. I must say, and I don't mean to insult anyone, but I'm glad I have regular human ears and not Vulcan Spock ears lol. I often hear people talk about how bad production is on certain albums, how bad the 1998 cd remasters are, where they can hear the tiniest of mistakes or even to the absolute minute and second of a song where they can here Bruce sing one word that might have a subtle touch of auto tune. Honestly I hear nothing of the sort. I've tried to listen to certain sections of songs where people have pointed out stuff and just cannot hear the auto tuning or the mistakes. Also I have absolutely no problem with the 1998 cd remasters which is saying something as I own all of the 2 disc special re releases where you got a bonus disc of the singles from the albums with their b sides and these seem to be lorded as the best sounding cd versions.

I don't get how some people can actually get enjoyment out of listening to music if your ears are so sensitive that they can pick up on the slightest of anything that might be a bit off. That would drive me up the wall. I feel very lucky to be able to kick back, stick on a CD and just listen and enjoy.

Anyway enough of my meaningless waffle, just felt I needed to get that off my chest. Hope to offer a better contribution to this forum next time I post :)

Keep up the great posting folks.
 
As long as the songs are great the production issues would hardly matter to me. If the sound is good enough for Maiden, its good enough for me
 
Wayne Bond said:
Also I have absolutely no problem with the 1998 cd remasters which is saying something as I own all of the 2 disc special re releases where you got a bonus disc of the singles from the albums with their b sides and these seem to be lorded as the best sounding cd versions.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum :) . As far as I am concerned, I also put the quality of the song itself above the way it has been produced, though really bad production can affect one's listening pleasure (e.g "brickwalled" albums such Metallica's Death Magnetic and Queensrÿche's self-titled 2013 release).

Besides, I may not have understood you well, but the reeditions containing a second disc with the B-sides are not from 1998 but 1995 (with an X Factor visual inside the CD case).
 
Black Bart said:
Welcome to the forum :) . As far as I am concerned, I also put the quality of the song itself above the way it has been produced, though really bad production can affect one's listening pleasure (e.g "brickwalled" albums such Metallica's Death Magnetic and Queensrÿche's self-titled 2013 release).

Besides, I may not have understood you well, but the reeditions containing a second disc with the B-sides are not from 1998 but 1995 (with an X Factor visual inside the CD case).
Click to expand...

Hi Black Bart

Not sure if I explained myself correctly but I own both. I have all the 2 disc editions and I purchas d the eddies head box set which has the 1998 remasters. I mentioned the remasters as I've heard people on this forum say they were mastered badly and I've also seen threads where people say the 2 disc re releases are the best sounding quality.

I have all the 1998 remasters added to iTunes as they sound louder on my iPod. This is crucial as iPods in the UK seem to have a volume cap added to them which makes a lot of CDs sound very quiet. When listening to CDs at home I tend to listen to the 2 disc versions as my eddies head boxset is kept somewhere safe and away from dust so instead of getting it out every time I want to listen to a cd I tend to just grab one of the 2 disc ones from my shelf.

Can't say as I can really notice anything different in the albums to be honest other than I have to turn the volume up quite a bit when playing the CDs :)
 
Oh Maiden, those sloppy bastards. They think they can just enter a studio and record a good album straight away... how foolish. They should follow other bands and take some serious and long time with the recording process or suffer a bit from something like I Lost My Iphone with Riffs Tragedy. That would teach ‘em a lesson.

And seriously, if this “live approach” to the album results in something like SoL, then I’m sold. It has really good, positive vibe, I can hear the guys having good time playing it (though I’d like it to be a bit more studio-like polished).They should do what makes them tick and what they think is right at the moment. Sure, SoL is not perfect, but entertaining as hell. And that’s what I expect from TBoS – good entertainment.

If they didn’t care, they wouldn’t release TBoS at all or, God forbid, returned “to their roots”. That would be horrible and insincere. I’m glad they keep recording new stuff and we all have a chance to listen to some new Maiden music from time to time. If that’s “not caring”, then I’m okay with it.
 
I love new Maiden and think their last four albums are the best they've ever done. I also really like the sound they had with AMOLAD and TFF, the raw production sound. It has the same feel as their 'classic' earlier stuff like NoTB or Power slave etc. That being said, I do hope someday the make another album that has the same sound and feel as BNW. I love the more polished sound if that album.

I also think people forget that BNW was a reunion-era IM album with shorter 'rockers'. Let's not forget that. They're still willing.
 
Not that I think that they don't care but we already spotted a really nasty mistake in a 5 minute straight rocker. There is a purpose to recording in an actual studio,isn't there?!
 
FWIW, there's an interview with Nicko where he says they left in mistakes from TFF. I've heard mistakes on other albums too, so this isn't anything new really. It's just the way they like to operate, doesn't have to be perfect.
 
Gk1 said:
Not that I think that they don't care but we already spotted a really nasty mistake in a 5 minute straight rocker. There is a purpose to recording in an actual studio,isn't there?!
Click to expand...
I don't find that mistake nasty at all.
It's like saying a person is not attractive because of a gray hair or an inconspicuous pimple.
 
mckindog said:
I don't find that mistake nasty at all.
It's like saying a person is not attractive because of a gray hair or an inconspicuous pimple.
Click to expand...

:facepalm:

I never said that the song is not good. I just think that while in the studio it would not harm to pay some more attention to the end result. And this mistake is quite severe. I can hear it everytime even with the muddy sound and all. :innocent:
 
Gk1 said:
:facepalm:

I never said that the song is not good. I just think that while in the studio it would not harm to pay some more attention to the end result. And this mistake is quite severe. I can hear it everytime even with the muddy sound and all. :innocent:
Click to expand...

Never meant to imply you did.
Just saying that it has no impact on my enjoyment of the song and am glad that is the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top