Judas Priest vs Iron Maiden

M

Mysterio

Invader
These two bands have been duking it out since the 80's.  I have been a casual fan of both.  So in your oppinion what is the difference between the two bands.

In my limited listning of both.  JP have more of a grinding sound and biker image They like faster shorter songs.  Kind of like a Good version of the Hells Angels.

IM have a war cry galloping sound.  I always feel like I am going into battle with IM.  Its kind of like the Beatles vs the Stones.  Although its a hard to compare.  I also think that IM is more popular world round.  The Winnipeg show is sold out.  JP is not, but JP will have a lot of people.

Anyways I will hold my comments to see what others think.

Mysterio
 
Comparing Maiden to Priest is like comparing the Sex Pistols to Kajagoogoo, or apples to strawberries...

Not a very clever topic, imo...  :huh:
 
Maverick said:
Comparing Maiden to Priest is like comparing the Sex Pistols to Kajagoogoo, or apples to strawberries...

Not a very clever topic, imo...  :huh:
Click to expand...
As are most comparisons. That's the thing about comparing; You weight two different things against the other. That's kind of the whole point.  :P Or, you weigh two more or less similar against one another, but there must always be a difference if you are to compare something.
 
Sorry, I'm just applying the scientific method here... maybe I shouldn't.  ::)
 
They are both good. I prefer Iron Maiden, as I'm sure you'll find most people here do, otherwise we'd be having this discussion on the JP boards.

By the way, Judas Priest has been described as one of Iron Maiden's musical influences.
 
Deano said:
By the way, Judas Priest has been described as one of Iron Maiden's musical influences.
Click to expand...

Perhaps just a tiny bit - it's hard to imagine that Steve never listened to them in the 70s. However, the whole dual-guitar thing Steve has credited to a Wishbone Ash influence many many times. And that's no joke - I've been listening to a bunch of Wishbone Ash lately, and the influence is very obvious there.
 
True, my thoughts on this influence isn't so much in their musical style but more in sticking with their vision of creating a metal band and not bowing to punk. I think having Priest there gave them the confidence to set out and play what they wanted to play.
 
Mysterio said:
These two bands have been duking it out since the 80's.  I have been a casual fan of both.  So in your oppinion what is the difference between the two bands.

In my limited listning of both.  JP have more of a grinding sound and biker image They like faster shorter songs.  Kind of like a Good version of the Hells Angels.

IM have a war cry galloping sound.  I always feel like I am going into battle with IM.  Its kind of like the Beatles vs the Stones.  Although its a hard to compare.  I also think that IM is more popular world round.  The Winnipeg show is sold out.  JP is not, but JP will have a lot of people.

Anyways I will hold my comments to see what others think.

Mysterio
Click to expand...

Its a silly relationship that people keep bringing up time and time again, it usually ends up with Priest being sort of incorrectly "lobbed in with the rest" of the NWOBHM scene. It also leads to silly arguments and comments, just like with the whole Bruce vs. Blaze thing.

Priest are not as popular as Maiden for one reason only: Eddie. Maiden are marketed far more and better than Priest are mostly because of their album artwork. However, Maiden do make more of an effort to appeal to the younger fans than Priest do as well, its not all Eddies work, its more Rod Smallwood & Co's work.
Priest are still popular, but less with the younger generations and they are "less known" rather than "under-rated" as some people seem to believe.

Musically speaking, there are, obviously, some similarities, but then a lot of bands from the era have similarities, just like the grunge bands and the thrash metal bands have similarities, thats sort of the point. However, because of Priest being slightly older, they are a little more hard rock rooted and have kept that edge to them, while Maiden have gone down a more progressive route. Nostradamus may change this though.

So, in conclusion, the differences between the two:
1. Song subject material
2. Style of playing
3. Marketing
4. Popularity with the younger audiences

Some similarities:
1. Both have singers that have similar styles
2. Twin harmonised guitars
3. Consistent careers, with an (arguably) flawless discography
4. A few different line-ups, Maiden more than Priest, but still, its there, both have arguments between the fans (Paul vs Bruce vs Blaze and Rob vs Tim)
 
SinisterMinisterX said:
Perhaps just a tiny bit - it's hard to imagine that Steve never listened to them in the 70s. However, the whole dual-guitar thing Steve has credited to a Wishbone Ash influence many many times. And that's no joke - I've been listening to a bunch of Wishbone Ash lately, and the influence is very obvious there.
Click to expand...

Maiden did open for Priest during the Iron Maiden or Killers tour, I forget which one.  Doesn't that mean that they acknowledged Priest as an influence?

Interesting, though, because I've never given much attention to Maiden's influences.  I mainly listen to bands that have been influenced by Maiden, and the influence there is sometimes very clear, but I've never thought of it the other way round.

And Ardius: I'm not quite convinced on that marketing thing; I do think that Maiden is more popular also because Maiden's music is also more appealing to the average listener for some reason.  I know a lot of people who only listen to music as MP3s and who have heard both Maiden and Priest and still like Maiden more, though in downloaded MP3s the image, album art, and marketing play almost no role.  For me, too, it wasn't Eddie who got me into Maiden; it was downloaded MP3s.
 
Invader said:
Maiden did open for Priest during the Iron Maiden or Killers tour, I forget which one.  Doesn't that mean that they acknowledged Priest as an influence?

Interesting, though, because I've never given much attention to Maiden's influences.  I mainly listen to bands that have been influenced by Maiden, and the influence there is sometimes very clear, but I've never thought of it the other way round.

And Ardius: I'm not quite convinced on that marketing thing; I do think that Maiden is more popular also because Maiden's music is also more appealing to the average listener for some reason.  I know a lot of people who only listen to music as MP3s and who have heard both Maiden and Priest and still like Maiden more, though in downloaded MP3s the image, album art, and marketing play almost no role.  For me, too, it wasn't Eddie who got me into Maiden; it was downloaded MP3s.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but my point is that people's percieved awareness of Maiden and Priest's popularity comes from how much they hear their names mentioned or see them advertised, etc. (well, maybe i didnt really say that in my post, but I meant to, lol) As such, people percieve Maiden to be more popular because of the marketing and all round better presence in all media forms.
 
KK or Glenn once said in an interview something like: There are a lot of new bands, copying us, like Iron Maiden. I found on the net (only that bit, not the whole interview), I`ll try to find it again.
 
I have no problem with comparing my two favorite metal bands. There's much to say about it.

Priest was really as popular as Maiden, for a long time. Perhaps not during the Ripper years, but with Rob they were and, I assume, still are very popular. I believe Priest have even sold more albums in the USA than Maiden did. However, the problem is that Priest doesn't get that many new fans as Maiden does.

Judas Priest put more emphasis on the guitars than on the rhythm section (bass & drums) like Iron Maiden do. Their music is not as complex as Maiden's and their lyrics are not as intelligent as Maiden's but with Halford they have a great vocalist and I love the guitar solos of Priest as well (apart from the stuff on the Ripper-albums).

In Maiden's music, you can find way more tempo and rhythm changes and rhythm variations. Iron Maiden is not "just another heavy metal band" as Priest to me. Priest sounds more typically Heavy Metal, it's their image, their trademark but also their sound. I don't literally mean that Priest is just another heavy metal band. I mean that Priest has been more of a typical (trademark) metal band (which surely might change on their upcoming double album!), not meaning it's a bad thing. Maiden made three or even four times as many songs with tempo and rhythm variations than Priest did. Priest's 80's stuff (that's 5 albums!) is very basic when it comes to the use of rhythms. The material in this era has hardly any tempo and rhythm changes, and on the albums with such changes, the songs still have less changes than the average Maiden songs have.

Iron Maiden is not only one of the most important and influential bands of the metal genre, but also they have an unmistakable sound. There are many bands that sound like Judas Priest, but who sounds like Iron Maiden (as much as Maiden themselves)? You can hear Maiden's influence in many, but they're still more unique, because no other band writes songs like Maiden does and no other band plays and sounds like Maiden. It's unique. Priest's Painkiller was also important for the evolvement of power metal and many bands have copied this and sound like this.
 
I can't stress how important these two bands are to me, but in a nutshell they can't really outdo each other since they have so many unique strengths and weaknesses.

Some priest songs are specifically crafted to appeal to a wider audience, while some Maiden songs are listenable enough to be liked without them even trying. It's really a matter of taste but for me Maiden didn't have to do a catchy song or similar to rouse the fans.
I do praise priest for their energetic riffs and their guitar work, while I think of Maiden as all around because all instruments do a harmonic job.

One major similarity of the two is that they love putting repetitive choruses on some songs. I'm rather neutral on this because as long as the chorus is tasteful (Blood Brothers, Brave New World, Longest Day, Painkiller, Rock Hard Ride Free, Riding on the Wind, For the Greater Good Of Godfor starters) but sometimes it's not that good (Angel And The Gambler, Bloodstone, Quest For Fire, Back In The Village, Caught Somewhere In Time, Jawbreaker). But it's just one aspect anyway.

In terms of the guitar solos, it's a big difference. The three Amigos don't exactly aim for speed sans Janick, though Janick is great and knows melody a lot, and they deliver it tastefully. Priest solos are in a nutshell ferocious and rousing. They can be hit and miss though, but when they get it right it's just as tasteful as Iron Maiden. However i respect both bands because they can play slow and nice if they want to, and it almost always hits a melodic zenith. (Dual solo in Rock Hard Ride free and the dual solo in Blood Brothers; both are not necesarilly fast but melodic and satisfying)

Last but not least is that both bands had to endure losing their trademark vocalist and enjoy welcoming them back, which is a landmark in metal anyways :P
 
Priest are not as popular as Maiden for one reason only: Eddie. Maiden are marketed far more and better than Priest are mostly because of their album artwork. However, Maiden do make more of an effort to appeal to the younger fans than Priest do as well, its not all Eddies work, its more Rod Smallwood & Co's work.
Click to expand...

Iron Maiden's artwork may have been more marketed but Judas Priest has always recieved far more radio play (at least in the U.S.).

This debate is soooooooooooo... 1984.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with 1984, that was a great year!  :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top