NOW PLAYING

____no5 said:
Having suffered the No Praying for the Dying embarrassment...
Of course, I couldn't imagine that it would take me a 10 good years to take a full almost ecstatic satisfaction from a Maiden release: 29 May 2000.
Click to expand...
FOTD? Return to form. Yeah, at least 3 songs could have been cut, but all songs have good to great parts. Only 1 song has a weak chorus imo. The guitar work is outstanding. I've said it before, if the album had 8-9 songs, it would have been considered another classic, although the album was successful.

NPFTD has its problems, but embarrassment? It's an underrated album with only 2 really weak songs imo. Again, the instrumental work is great. The album also brought Dave as a more porminent songwriter. They were all exhausted from the 80's, plus a band member change (note: Janick didn't write anything for the album). My point of view:

- the production should have been better.
- most of the songs don't have the usual strong Maiden chorus.
- the album would have been different with at least 3 longer songs (7 minutes long, for example), written by Steve/Bruce or Adrian/Janick.
- chasing trends (even more so with the next album), shorter songs, weak rock-type of songs (FOTD has too... no, I'm not talking about song #2).

I'm not mentioning the 2 Blaze albums because they were a stylistic change for the band.
 
GhostofCain said:
I need to revisit that album. I ended up loathing it (probably due to overexposure in the radio, magazine, etc.), but I am now 32 years older (and perhaps wiser, regardless what Judas Priest made me think :lol: ).
Click to expand...
As with many things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle. The album's production is pristine and there are some great hooks and a few all-time classic songs on the album, but it also feels forcibly dumbed down vs. their previous work and has some obvious filler. The sometimes awkward vocal ad-libs (woah-oh, yeah-yeah, ooh, etc.) are also a very mixed bag.
 
Kalata said:
FOTD? Return to form. Yeah, at least 3 songs could have been cut, but all songs have good to great parts. Only 1 song has a weak chorus imo. The guitar work is outstanding. I've said it before, if the album had 8-9 songs, it would have been considered another classic, although the album was successful.
Click to expand...

Too little too late. And I'm talking from the perspective of the impact those albums had. Being a teenager one identifies himself largely with his favourite bands and take things personally, i.e. worries about sales and those kind of things. Well I did.
Summer of 1992 Nevermind was huge already, Metallica was huge, Queensrÿche, G'nR forget about it. Friends from Metal community were talking about Maiden like if they were belonging to the past already, i.e., if Afraid to shoot Strangers were released in 1983 it would be a Classic now this kind of things.
Yes FotD was a kind of return to form but paled in comparison with the impact Metallica and other above mentioned albums had. Not even remotely close.
The one album that didn't make the impact that should have make at that time was the best of them all, Rust in Peace, now considered by many the best metal album of all time and absolute jewel of 1990. Painkiller did a more immediate impact, not commercial but leaving people in awe.
Not to mention that releasing a double album right after the Black Album plus with a ballad inside felt like a rip off too.
 
Iron_Maiden_-_Senjutsu.jpg
 
____no5 said:
Too little too late. And I'm talking from the perspective of the impact those albums had. Being a teenager one identifies himself largely with his favourite bands and take things personally, i.e. worries about sales and those kind of things. Well I did.
Summer of 1992 Nevermind was huge already, Metallica was huge, , G'nR forget about it. Friends from Metal community were talking about Maiden like if they were belonging to the past already, i.e., if Afraid to shoot Strangers were released in 1983 it would be a Classic now this kind of things.
Yes FotD was a kind of return to form but paled in comparison with the impact Metallica and other above mentioned albums had. Not even remotely close.
The one album that didn't make the impact that should have make at that time was the best of them all, Rust in Peace, now considered by many the best metal album of all time and absolute jewel of 1990. Painkiller did a more immediate impact, not commercial but leaving people in awe.
Not to mention that releasing a double album right after the Black Album plus with a ballad inside felt like a rip off too.
Click to expand...
It was not too late, just 2 years apaprt. NPFTD is not one of the highlight albums of 1990, but after 7 amazing albums in a row, it was time for a weaker one. It's normal. FOTD probably didn't have a huge impact because Bruce left after it. I think it's a better album than many albums from the 1991/1992 perioid. About the double album and the ballad - Maiden already had an album with 11 songs and the ballad is not that different from the band's previous slow songs. And let's not forget that Adrian wanted to write a ballad in 1988. You mentioned Metallica, Queensrÿche and G'nR - Metallica changed their style and that led to the huge impact of the album, Maiden had already done the stuff that Queensrÿche were doing in 1990 and even one Maiden song is enough to be better than G'nR. To add more - Maiden, unlike Priest and other bands, did not chase the trends that much.
 
Kalata said:
It was not too late, just 2 years apaprt.
Click to expand...

Time is relative. Take a look at those photos: There are just 6 8years between them. Those people had grow old in 8years and they weren't even 30!!

front.jpg

1990 -1991 were formative years for metal. Time was dense. Sometimes time is dense sometimes loose. Nothing looked the same again by summer of 1992. Between 1988 and 1991 there are just 3 years but it's like they've been a decade or more. Nothing looked the same.

Look at 30-year old Maiden how old they look. How outdated already.

iron_maiden_-_no_prayer_for_the_dying_back.jpg

Kalata said:
To add more - Maiden, unlike Priest and other bands, did not chase the trends that much.
Click to expand...

NPftD was a chase of trend and a step in a fucking perfect direction. Genius timing. Just the songs were incredibly weak, especially considering what amazing albums have been release in 1990 (some say best year in Metal)
 
Last edited:
____no5 said:
1990 -1991 were formative years for metal. Time was dense. Sometimes time is dense sometimes loose. Nothing looked the same again by summer of 1992. Between 1988 and 1991 there are just 3 years but it's like they've been a decade or more. Nothing looked the same.
Click to expand...
I agree. What I meant was that it wasn't too late for Maiden to make a statement again with a new album.

Oh, and NPFTD back cover is metaaaaaallllllll! Aarghhhhh...
____no5 said:
NPftD was a chase of trend and a step in a fucking perfect direction. Genius timing. Just the songs were incredibly weak, especially considering what amazing albums have been release in 1990 (some say best year in Metal)
Click to expand...
1984 too. It wasn't a right step for Maiden imo. But the timing was perfect. We will always wonder how much better the album would have been with songs from Adrian (not in the style of Hooks) or Janick - or with more time for writing (like their original plan was).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top