General fan vibe during the Blaze days

TAY666 said:
For me, it wasn't just the Blaze era. That was kind of the last straw, but for me, personally Maiden had lost a lot of my interest for all of the 90's.

I discovered Maiden in 1982, when I was 15.
Click to expand...

Same here, but I discovered them a year later, and 2 years younger.

Huge superfan through my teens. Seventh Son was a bit of a letdown for me -- just a matter of personal taste. But by 1990-1991, the ratio of crap to good stuff in mainstream hard rock and metal kept going up and up; and I was branching out into other types of music. On the hard rock front, Jane's Addiction, Chili Peppers, the first Smashing Pumpkins album, Faith No More, Ministry -- all sounded a lot fresher than the new output from the metal and hard rock bands that I had loved in the mid-80s.

Strangely enough, the Seattle grunge bands didn't grab me much when they were new; I didn't really appreciate Soundgarden & Alice In Chains until years later; and never truly warmed up to STP. Pearl Jam's 1st was OK, & I could take Nirvana in small doses.

Anyway, by the time I heard tracks from Fear of the Dark or No Prayer for the Dying, I was pretty much over being excited about new output from Maiden, and I ignored them through the rest of the 1990s. The 90s was just a crappy time for rock in general, with a few exceptions -- some of which I appreciated right away like early Marilyn Manson or Nine Inch Nails, some of which I didn't appreciate until a few years later like Radiohead or Oasis. And the different directions metal took in the 90s mostly didn't grab me. But with all the complete shyte on the radio -- Sublime, Sugar Ray, Counting Crows, Blink-182, 311, Green Day, Collective Soul, Creed, Matchbox 20, Third Eye Blind, Blind Melon, and all the shitty nu-metal -- I started going back deeper into 70s rock and learning about jazz, rather than try to keep up with new rock and metal music. I figured that if anything new was good, I'd learn about it eventually.

So, long story short -- during the Blaze days Iron Maiden was effectively dead to me. Not that I stopped appreciating what they'd done when they were "alive" and putting out stuff I liked; but I just wasn't looking forward to anything new from them again.
 
Last edited:
AlexS said:
Same here, but I discovered them a year later, and 2 years younger.

Huge superfan through my teens. Seventh Son was a bit of a letdown for me -- just a matter of personal taste. But by 1990-1991, the ratio of crap to good stuff in mainstream hard rock and metal kept going up and up; and I was branching out into other types of music. On the hard rock front, Jane's Addiction, Chili Peppers, the first Smashing Pumpkins album, Faith No More, Ministry -- all sounded a lot fresher than the new output from the metal and hard rock bands that I had loved in the mid-80s.

Strangely enough, the Seattle grunge bands didn't grab me much when they were new; I didn't really appreciate Soundgarden & Alice In Chains until years later; and never truly warmed up to STP. Pearl Jam's 1st was OK, & I could take Nirvana in small doses.

Anyway, by the time I heard tracks from Fear of the Dark or No Prayer for the Dying, I was pretty much over being excited about new output from Maiden, and I ignored them through the rest of the 1990s. The 90s was just a crappy time for rock in general, with a few exceptions -- some of which I appreciated right away like early Marilyn Manson or Nine Inch Nails, some of which I didn't appreciate until a few years later like Radiohead or Oasis. And the different directions metal took in the 90s mostly didn't grab me. But with all the complete shyte on the radio -- Sublime, Sugar Ray, Counting Crows, Blink-182, 311, Green Day, Collective Soul, Creed, Matchbox 20, Third Eye Blind, Blind Melon, and all the shitty nu-metal -- I started going back into 70s rock and learning about jazz, rather than try to keep up with new rock and metal music. I figured that if it was good, I'd learn about it eventually.

So, long story short -- during the Blaze days Iron Maiden was effectively dead to me. Not that I stopped appreciating what they'd done when they were "alive" and putting out stuff I liked; but I just wasn't looking forward to anything new from them again.
Click to expand...


These types of post are very interesting. They explain how I feel about Maiden since A Matter of Life and Death. Creatively, the band dont hook me as they used to. I see every show and enjoy it, but the records, I just dont look that much forward to it anymore.
 
I can confirm that FOTD is one of, if not the worst Iron Maiden album.
I think its telling that the bands worst album still has crackers like Be Quick or be Dead, Wasting Love, FOTD and the stunning Judas Be My Guide. Still pretty pish though. Proof, if ever it was needed, that chart positions mean dick all
 
Niall Kielt said:
I can confirm that FOTD is one of, if not the worst Iron Maiden album.
I think its telling that the bands worst album still has crackers like Be Quick or be Dead, Wasting Love, FOTD and the stunning Judas Be My Guide. Still pretty pish though. Proof, if ever it was needed, that chart positions mean dick all
Click to expand...
I dunno, I find FOTD to be a very enjoyable album and one Maiden's best. Sure, compared to Powerslave or Seventh Son it's mediocre, yet Maiden took some mediocre songs and made them fun if not great. Only one song on the album would I call bad - Fear Is The Key - and only one other song would I consider subpar - Weekend Warrior - but nonetheless, I can still listen to them. FOTD is one of my favorite Maiden albums personally. I guess this fits more in the Unpopular Opinions Thread but yeah, I love it.
 
I agree with the two tunes you mentioned, they stand out in their pishness. Still, I listened to A Real Live One the other day, for the first time in quite a while and I was surprised at how much I liked From Here To Eternity. Not a bad album but still the worst for me. And those outfits in the sleeve, fuck me, shockin bad stuff, terrible array of coats, give me spandex any day
 
fekso said:
These types of post are very interesting. They explain how I feel about Maiden since A Matter of Life and Death. Creatively, the band dont hook me as they used to. I see every show and enjoy it, but the records, I just dont look that much forward to it anymore.
Click to expand...

Similar here. Though Book of Souls have a few that I really do like and listen to often.
But the 2 previous albums were just 'meh' for me.
 
AlexS said:
Strangely enough, the Seattle grunge bands didn't grab me much when they were new; I didn't really appreciate Soundgarden & Alice In Chains until years later; and never truly warmed up to STP. Pearl Jam's 1st was OK, & I could take Nirvana in small doses.
Click to expand...

Similar, except I never warmed up to Soundgarden, do now enjoy STP. And to this day I still don't understand the love for Nirvana.

Unlike you though, I did enjoy the numetal.
I thought it brought back the fun, and the energy that had been missing since the early days of 'hair metal' before it got so commercial.
 
Nu-metal and hair metal are both contrived and cheesy genres, but I've always enjoyed hair metal far more. If you strip away the cornball antics/fashion/lyrics, most hair metal bands still had some really memorable songs. Nu-metal? Not so much IMO.

In the late 90s, I was also irritated that nu-metal was overshadowing more interesting bands like Nine Inch Nails, Ministry, Type O Negative, and even Tool.
 
soundwave said:
Nu-metal and hair metal are both contrived and cheesy genres, but I've always enjoyed hair metal far more. If you strip away the cornball antics/fashion/lyrics, most hair metal bands still had some really memorable songs. Nu-metal? Not so much IMO.
Click to expand...
I kind of feel the same. Nu-metal may have a few good songs, but most of it isn't that great. Hair metal, on the other hand, is one of my favorite metal / rock subgenres. Sure, it's cheesy, but it's also fun, great guitar solos, an all-round blast.
 
Aye, for me, Nu-Metal was mostly a thing I scorned my mates for liking at the time. I couldn't listen to more than 10mins of Linkin Park. Certainly, there are gems (as evidenced above, rollin, rollin, rollin) but the 70/80s was always much more my thing even though my dance floors where filled with 90/00s stuff. Try as I might, I never got the dj to play Transylvania. Still, Tribute was played every night so life was good. But the 90s pissed me off at times, like who the fuck wants to hear the bastardin Gin Blossoms on a Friday night? Not fuckin me. Now, 90s dance, thats a different story. Some of the best songs ever written. Gods bless Haddaway
 
TAY666 said:
I thought it brought back the fun, and the energy that had been missing since the early days of 'hair metal' before it got so commercial.
Click to expand...

Linkin Park is not metal in any sense of this term. If they're anything-metal, so is Sade


Distrotred guitars don't make you metal, and there's more 4/4 palm muting in this song than in some 'nu-metal'.

Besides bands lumped into that nu-label didn't have lyrical or thematic cohesion. They have similar sound in a way but that's about it. Personally I think 90s were good for metal, LA scene died for good, we got Florida scene instead. The bay area guys got mellow, but a bit younger bands of same genre didn't, such as Pantera and Testament. Bands that were labeled alternative in the beginning but should've been labeled progressive instead, from day 1, like Tool and Faith No More. Maiden was unpopular around one fucking album, due to combo of different things - peak years of "the old ways suck", change of sound, change of lyrical themes, change of vocalist. When bands do a critical change, that album doesn't rate average - it will either flop or explode. In a commercial 94/95 MTV ruled music world, Maiden flopped, a good sign of right times to come. Besides, Bruce Dickinson released bulk of his work in the 90s. Both him and Smith, together with Maiden, came out fully recharged from that 'grim period', that was affecting US market, UK market, but certainly not South America and mainland Europe, and for just couple of years. Grunge is another thing, it has its own roots, it's not anti-metal in any way, just like prog rock, it's its own thing, influenced by metal and influencing metal in the process. MTV did not kill metal, MTV killed grunge if you want it responsible for killing music genres. Grunge was made by a certain group of artists that wanted to stay away from the mainstream as far as possible, MTV got them just that. Metal as a musical movement had this decline period in mid 1970s, 2-3 years of general despair, charge with new ideas, new bands, and by 1980 we know what happened. Same with 2000.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Of course the best thing the 90s ever gave us was Rust In Peace, but that was released at the very beginning so not sure if it counts or not...
 
My general impression was that grunge did for hair metal (or "nouveau poodle rock" as one guitar publication once called it!) the same as punk had done for prog in the '70s, ie given it a kick up the proverbial which it desperately needed by then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top