IRON MAIDEN ALBUMS SURVIVOR: POWERSLAVE WINS

Satisfied?

  • Total voters
    26
frus said:
Cmon guys, you talk about SIT like it's full of synthesizers (guitar or otherwise) or something. It's actually pretty understated and in the background
Click to expand...
Yea, the guitar synths is a bizarre thing to complain about because they're really only there for texture and used somewhat sparingly.

I love the guitar sound. It's very 80s but it sounds great and I think it fits the material. The songs at least have space-y futuristic vibe, so it's not like they employed all those effects for songs about pyramids.
 
Mosh said:
The songs at least have space-y futuristic vibe
Click to expand...
And which are those? Songs about selling your soul to devil, spending your time on touring, horrors of monster cities, near death experiences, running long distances, being frozen, having deja vu, or history lessons? The only spacey thing besides the uncessant echo is the cover
 
A lot of those songs (especially the Adrian penned ones) could be associated with the emptiness and loneliness of space. Not everything has to be taken literally, it's really up to the listener's interpretation. But the sonics help that.
 
The Flash said:
Yeah I know you meant the sound. My point stands.

I don't give a damn what you'd want to do today, when I'm talking about an album made in 1986. That's the point. Don't want to repeat myself, but do you look at a cup from Antiquity and say "you wouldn't want your cup like that today, so it makes this one less valuable"?
Click to expand...
I can look at Powerslave and POM and say that I'd love an album today to have that sound. So it is not the times, but the sound of SIT which for me is problematic. It doesn't sound nice at all.
 
jazz from hell said:
We don't complain about guitar synths, we just don't like the sound of the album. Doesn't matter if it's guitar synths, keyboards, or electric wind instruments.
Click to expand...
That is fair. I just noticed that the discussion seemed to be fixated on synthesizers when they really don't have that much presence on the album.

I agree with what Judas said a few posts earlier: It is a different sound for Maiden and I wouldn't expect everyone to like that.
 
The songwriting is better than on most albums, the guitar work is better than on most albums. The drumming is the best. Adrian brought the best out of himself. He delivered three excellent tracks, which had more of a melancholic feel than most other Maiden songs.

"Déja-Vu” is a dynamic up-tempo gem. The guitar synth has a major role in the like factor. It accentuates wonderfully.

The sound on this album really does it for me. What I like about the production is the drum sound which seems to blend so well with ‘Arry bass and the rest of the music. There’s a big chance that Nicko’s playing and his drum sound might influence my total appreciation for Somewhere in Time. We can hear that Adrian does a lot of different things than Dave, rhythm guitar wise. That's an extra which many other albums do not have. There’s so much melody on this album and the production fits perfectly to that.

All studio versions of these songs I like better than all the live versions I have ever heard. This says enough about how special this album is, doesn't it? How do others feel about this? Also prefer studio versions?

EDIT:
To the people who voted for Piece of Mind last night, thanks you rule. :edmetal:
 
Last edited:
Mosh said:
That is fair. I just noticed that the discussion seemed to be fixated on synthesizers when they really don't have that much presence on the album.

I agree with what Judas said a few posts earlier: It is a different sound for Maiden and I wouldn't expect everyone to like that.
Click to expand...

This was more or less my point (and this is also a response to Cried) - I honestly don't know what's synthesizers and what's amps etc., I was talking about the overall sound of the album, how different it is, that it might sound controversial to some and that to me, personally, it strangely makes the album more exhausting for me (I can't really explain why, that's just a subjective feeling).

Forostar said:
The songwriting is better than on most albums, the guitar work is better than on most albums. The drumming is the best, the bass playing is of a very high level.
Click to expand...

I agree with the technical part, especially the guitars. The songwriting... I don't know. Individually, almost every song is a gem - there's little I can complain about with the songs. But as a whole, it's somewhat... monotonous. And I don't know whether the sound or the songwriting or whatever is to blame. When I get around Runner/SIASL, I'm beginning to yawn, though the songs are still good. Can anyone explain this?

Also, is it just me or did Bruce have a weaker moment on this album? I think the World Slavery Tour might be behind that.

To be completely fair, I personally think that AMOLAD too is very "united" and even monotonous, as far as both the sound and the songwriting are concerned. It also sounds somewhat different from your typical Maiden. And I therefore understand how someone might dislike it. But it's closer to my liking than SIT.
 
Obviously, but just in case. To everyone who prefers SIT over AMOLAD, vote for the latter in the next round if you haven't done so already. This is the only way to have SIT end up higher. I know it's hard to kill your darlings but this is the only way. The rest is not under threat. It could be a full on SIT vs AMOLAD battle.
 
Last edited:
I agree with that. The songs work much less without the production, IMHO. However it also makes you question the songwriting aspect of it as well. Also remember, like I said, individually, I'm completely crazy about the songs (bar HCW), it's just when they're put together on the album, they either sound too similar (whether it's the production or the approach to melodies or whatever)... Would be interesting to hear the whole album performed live, for once, even if the songs would sound worse.
 
In a way it would be good if songs are suited for a live environment, and SIT doesn't seem to be very successful in this regard. Can we have one album in the discography that works different? Yes we can.

It also says something about the high standards of this album. Makes it an extra good studio product. The sound, the atmosphere, maybe even the playing, it can't be recreated. That's why these recordings should be cherished. They're the best versions there are.
JudasMyGuide said:
However it also makes you question the songwriting aspect of it as well. Also remember, like I said, individually, I'm completely crazy about the songs (bar HCW), it's just when they're put together on the album, they either sound too similar (whether it's the production or the approach to melodies or whatever)...
Click to expand...
I don't recognize that. Albums from this line-up have songs that can sound like other songs (from other albums). On SIT the individual songs are different in content, very versatile in style, e.g. rhythms and tempo's. The connecting aspect is that it sounds so fluently and warm. And they contain the best solos from the discography.
 
Maiden only flirted with 1986. This is what 1986 rock/metal really sounded like:

 
That is one thing I really love about SIT. It is borrowing some new popular elements but it is still unmistakably Maiden. Turbo could've been done by any generic American glam metal band.
 
Forostar said:
It also says something about the high standards of this album. Makes it an extra good studio product. The sound, the atmosphere, maybe even the playing, it can't be recreated. That's why these recordings should be cherished. They're the best versions there are.
Click to expand...
I disagree. The sound can be recreated. They just don't. The playing, there's nothing there so special that they cannot do then or now.
I don't recognize that. Albums from this line-up have songs that can sound like other songs (from other albums). On SIT the individual songs are different in content, very versatile in style, e.g. rhythms and tempo's.
Click to expand...
To each his own. I personally see them as very similar in content.
The connecting aspect is that it sounds so fluently and warm. And they contain the best solos from the discography.
Click to expand...
Warm? I never would have thought I'd see that word applied to SiT. It feels cold as steel to me. As for the solos, well SiT has several good solos but only 3 or 4 are truly great. Same as with compositions: Wasted Years, HCW and Stranger are stellar (but still worse than the best stuff in NOTB, POM, Powerslave and even the debut), SoM is great, CSiT and Deja Vu are good enough and TLOTLDR and ATG are quite mediocre.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top