Songs that didn't work live

Might be a controversial one, but how about “Iron Maiden”?
Yes, please get this out of the set list forever. Sacrilege, I know, but the song kinda sucks. And get rid of "Sanctuary" and "Running Free" while you're at it, too. If you must play anything from the debut, stick to better stuff like "Prowler", "Remember Tomorrow", or even "Phantom Of The Opera" if you have to.
 
I never really enjoyed Running Free the three times I saw it.

I dislike the more loose feel it has when Nicko plays it, Clive's punchy rhythm was much better when playing it. Always paled in comparison to the studio version for me. Beast on the Road it sounded great where they stuck to the original arrangement rather than the eight-minute marathon it is now. Sure, it's a great opportunity for Bruce to talk to the audience and intro the band members, but he could do that prior to the first encore.
 
"Aces High" has never 'worked' live in my opinion. But I don't know, it really is a Maiden trademark to do songs that you can't really sing and then play them live anyway. So I'm kind of torn on it.

Judging by Stockholm video, it now works better than ever.
 
Really? The instrumentals sounded almost identical in some parts of this version.


that video is in a studio..... not a live performance at a venue. Plenty of people have done at home videos where the sound is replicated.... live is totally different game from studio
 
"Iron Maiden" doesn't work on the Legacy of the Beast Tour because of the giant Baphomet Eddie on stage during the song.

There is NO WAY I will cheer to an image of the enemy. I am extremely disappointed in Maiden for taking this route. This forum can laugh at me if it wants to. This is dead serious stuff, whether you realize it or not. What the hell is Steve thinking?
 
"Iron Maiden" doesn't work on the Legacy of the Beast Tour because of the giant Baphomet Eddie on stage during the song.

There is NO WAY I will cheer to an image of the enemy. I am extremely disappointed in Maiden for taking this route. This forum can laugh at me if it wants to. This is dead serious stuff, whether you realize it or not. What the hell is Steve thinking?
But artworks with devils, 666 etc in the past was ok?
 
that video is in a studio..... not a live performance at a venue. Plenty of people have done at home videos where the sound is replicated.... live is totally different game from studio
I've seen those guys play "Alex" live, and it sounded pretty good to me. Just as, if not better than in that video.
 
"Iron Maiden" doesn't work on the Legacy of the Beast Tour because of the giant Baphomet Eddie on stage during the song.

There is NO WAY I will cheer to an image of the enemy. I am extremely disappointed in Maiden for taking this route. This forum can laugh at me if it wants to. This is dead serious stuff, whether you realize it or not. What the hell is Steve thinking?
First of all: to whom Baphomet is an enemy is completely relative. It totally depends on one's religious point of view.

Second: Maiden's satanic imagery is not, and was never meant to be taken seriously (this is no more or less offensive than Eddie murdering Margaret Thatcher on the "Sanctuary" cover).

Third: last time I checked, we were in 2018, way past the bashing of supposed satanic references and the rejection of such images; the cover of The Number of the Beast caused many problems when it was released, but that was 1982. This is the 21st century. Religious imagery means squat, regardless of your religion; your own personal beliefs are the only things that matter. Using the image of Satan, Baphomet, whatever you choose to call him, especially inside a historical context (because Maiden's religious bashing is now history), doesn't mean anything.

No, I won't laugh at your post because, honestly, I find the way you think quite pathetic, outdated and, to some degree, intolerant to other religions (yes, Satanism is a religion, whether you like it or not), not to mention the hypocrisy of your username if you really do think like that.
 
Back
Top