Senjutsu - 3rd September 2021

Their songs now seem to be getting longer. Maybe they write longer songs to take up more space on the cd, to save them coming up with new songs. But I some how doubt that. The new album is great, but I still think the songs could be shorter.
 
chaosapiant said:
See, I think this is the key to whether you find Maiden songs too long/repetitive. At the end of the day it comes down to whether you like what you’re hearing or not. If you love a song, you probably don’t mind a chorus repeating a few times. And if you already don’t care for the music, a repetitive part just gets more grating and noticeable.































































Hell on Earth is a good example. Look at the thread for that song and you’ll see folks clamoring for a repeat of the cthink longers.































I think they should save or create longer versions of songs for live shows. Deep Purple are notorious for that. They can make a 5 min song last 3 months







See, I think this is the key to whether you find Maiden songs too long/repetitive. At the end of the day it comes down to whether you like what you’re hearing or not. If you love a song, you probably don’t mind a chorus repeating a few times. And if you already don’t care for the music, a repetitive part just gets more grating and noticeable.







Hell on Earth is a good example. Look at the thread for that song and you’I thinkhgll see folks clamoring for a repeat of the chorus.



See, I think this is the key to whether you find Maiden songs too long/repetitive. At the end of the day it comes down to whether you like what you’re hearing or not. If you love a song, you probably don’t mind a chorus repeating a few times. And if you already don’t care for the music, a repetitive part just gets more grating and noticeable.



Hell on EaIrth is a good example. Look at the thread for that song and you’ll see folks clamoring for a repeat of the chorus.
Click to expand...
 
Iron Lurker said:
So you don't think the title track is unnecessarily long? I don't, I love it - but using your measuring stick it could easily be trimmed down to under 6 minutes.

I think the songs on 7th Son are masterpieces and are of the right length. They don't outstay their welcome.
Click to expand...
 
DJMayes said:
6 minutes is just such an arbitrary length to pick out when so many of the bands most popular songs exceed it. It's a lazy reason to dislike a song.
Click to expand...
Doesn't have to be 6 mins. I just pulled that number out of the air. Could have chosen 5.10. Or 4.58. Sometimes you just know when a song is too long. Maybe they write longer songs now to take up album space ( but I doubt it) and saves them writing longer songs.
 
wandy said:
Doesn't have to be 6 mins. I just pulled that number out of the air. Could have chosen 5.10. Or 4.58. Sometimes you just know when a song is too long. Maybe they write longer songs now to take up album space ( but I doubt it) and saves them writing MORE songs
Click to expand...
 
@wandy why do you make your quoted messages so much longer than they were originally? Can’t you write them in six lines or less?
 
chaosapiant said:
See, I think this is the key to whether you find Maiden songs too long/repetitive. At the end of the day it comes down to whether you like what you’re hearing or not. If you love a song, you probably don’t mind a chorus repeating a few times. And if you already don’t care for the music, a repetitive part just gets more grating and noticeable.
Click to expand...
Although I agree, this is not entirely true for me - for example, I like the chorus of TAATG, but not for nearly 10 minutes. However, it seems most people don't like the long intros/outros in the long songs (that sometimes take 2-3 minutes from the whole song), but if you remove them, then the epics will lose integral parts of their ''souls'' imo. Every song has repetitive parts in it, short or long and the epics from the 80's are not an exception.
wandy said:
Their songs now seem to be getting longer. Maybe they write longer songs to take up more space on the cd, to save them coming up with new songs. But I some how doubt that. The new album is great, but I still think the songs could be shorter.
Click to expand...
No need to doubt. Steve is always full of ideas, Adrian too. And Steve loves to write epics with fairly long intros and instrumental sections since the 80's, so this should come as no surprise to anyone.
 
Last edited:
DJMayes said:
I think the outros are far more annoying than the intros, personally. Let the song go out on a bang and move onto the next one.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. I love me a good intro, but there are plenty of songs that would've ended stronger without the "Steve Harris perfect bookend".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jer
I think it depends on the song, cuz I love a lot of the intro / outro songs, particularly the ending trio of the last album. “The Book of Souls” should’ve ended with an eruption instead of a campfire, though.
 
Kalata said:
Although I agree, this is not entirely true for me - for example, I like the chorus of TAATG, but not for nearly 10 minutes. However, it seems most people don't like the long intros/outros in the long songs, but if you remove them, then the epics will lose integral parts of their ''souls'' imo.
Click to expand...
I would consider the Angel and the Gambler as an outlier...because at that point, yea, it's repeated too much. Like, it's repeated too much for any song and I like that song. I'm trying to think of a single other song that we could use as an example that isn't that one.

As an aside, I really wish the single/video cut of that song was the album version. There are a couple moments in the song where it begins to........slap...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top