"The Book of Souls" - Official pre-release thread (CONTAINS ALBUM SPOILERS)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Get worried! Speed of Light was a favourite track after a listen to the album.....
I think they meant "SoL is already a crowd favourite" instead of "The crowd's favourite song in the album was SoL". Besides, as Night Prowler said, people are not supposed to talk about other songs, Amazon in particular.
 
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe that this album will not be good. You always get some overhyped reviews by obvious die hard fans of the band but, I have yet to see ANY less than stellar reviews. Let alone any mediocre or average reviews. Every single one has been exceptional. The band cannot pay everyone to make a good review so I believe this album may be something special.

I have seen countless references to Mariner, the 1st 2 albums with Dianno vibe, old school 80's chunk & gallop to appease the golden era fans. Also many references to continuing the progression they started with the reunion era stuff for the newer fans.

It should have more than enough to make everyone happy. I simply can't wait much longer to hear this. The hype is ridiculous & its getting to me.
 
Does anyone seriously think Maiden are paying for good reviews? LOL

Some mags might be too cowardly to give Maiden bad reviews, but there's no way Maiden are actually paying anyone.
 
Does anyone seriously think Maiden are paying for good reviews? LOL

Some mags might be too cowardly to give Maiden bad reviews, but there's no way Maiden are actually paying anyone.
I heard rumor that there were two cisterns of Trooper under Metal Hammer building.
 
Does anyone seriously think Maiden are paying for good reviews? LOL

Yes. I think it's highly likely. If you are only thinking about money, that is a very limited viewpoint. I don't think they are offering up cash per se but, "incentives" without a doubt. Exclusives, giveaways, access, etc. That is paying, even if cash is not exchanged.

I am not trying to suggest or believe they are doing it heavily but, I'm sure it's being done & has been done.
 
So like, you suggest that Rod (or someone else) is going there to journalist and say something like "give BoS 9/10 and we give you some goodies/we won't get you goodies"? I mean - that is serious accusation.
 
Yes. I think it's highly likely. If you are only thinking about money, that is a very limited viewpoint. I don't think they are offering up cash per se but, "incentives" without a doubt. Exclusives, giveaways, access, etc. That is paying, even if cash is not exchanged.

I am not trying to suggest or believe they are doing it heavily but, I'm sure it's being done & has been done.

stuff like that happens no doubt that's just ordinary marketing, the magazines would still be free to give bad reviews like they have done on occasions in the past.
 
So like, you suggest that Rod (or someone else) is going there to journalist and say something like "give BoS 9/10 and we give you some goodies/we won't get you goodies"? I mean - that is serious accusation.

It's called "greasing". It's common place in all walks of life. You are making it out as if it's a negative. It happens every single day. You do me a solid here & I'll take care of you later? It's everywhere at all times.

I'll bring up 2 classic examples music wise. St. Anger & Chinese Democracy. I read too many positive reviews of these 2 albums which did not merit it whatsoever. Not trying to say both were utter garbage but, pretty close. And there were a few negative reviews of them but, the positive ones outweighed the negative ones.

Until it was released & the widely held belief of both of them was that they were crap.
 
Yeah, but after release you know the truth and then you can make such statement beacuse you have a point. Now - without album it's just throwing mud here and there by suggesting that person who wrote good review probably did it beacuse of some kind of profit. That's all what I have to say. I know situations like that exist (hell, I work in marketing) but still I think that writing that kind of accusations about people that may be innocent is simpli wrong. At least for me.
 
Yeah, but after release you know the truth and then you can make such statement beacuse you have a point. Now - without album it's just throwing mud here and there by suggesting that person who wrote good review probably did it beacuse of some kind of profit. That's all what I have to say. I know situations like that exist (hell, I work in marketing) but still I think that writing that kind of accusations about people that may be innocent is simpli wrong. At least for me.

But, you already agreed it's done all the time. So why would it be wrong to assume or say it? If you know it happens, why is it wrong to suggest it? That doesn't make any sense.

Also, I never said that they were doing it heavily. I don't think Rod is going out & blatantly saying good review for this & that. But, the presumption is already there without having to spell it out to the reviewer or magazine or whatever.

The simple fact of the matter is, we all know it, is that if you're greased with goodies, you are more inclined to be favorable than not.
 
So why didn't maiden offer incentives for TFF ? that didn't exactly get glowing reviews from blabbermouth , the various smaller metal sites that are giving TBOS 10s or terrorizer ( it got a 7) . Oh and st.anger got a ton of shitty reviews before its release, the only good one that I remember is blebbermouth's (8.5 I think) . Smaller metal sites buried it . Don't care about mainstream , non-metal, sites/magazines anyway .
 
Ok, but there is difference in giving something nice without expectations and giving something in exchange for better score. If we talking about simply giving them goodies and nothing more - there is no problem but we still can't assume that this had any impact on overall score.
 
I very much doubt bribes are involved. Some mags maybe have an agenda to keep Maiden fans. What also struck me yesterday is that the journos involved are often Maiden fans themselves.
 
Ok, but there is difference in giving something nice without expectations and giving something in exchange for better score. If we talking about simply giving them goodies and nothing more - there is no problem but we still can't assume that this had any impact on overall score.

Some of you are just running with what you think was said, not what wa actually said. Nor did I suggest that. In my original post, I simply said Maiden cannot pay everyone for a good review. That does not imply that they did. It also does not mean that they didn't. You are all making of it what you want.
 
So why didn't maiden offer incentives for TFF ?

Who is to say they didn't? They probably did. But, that doesn't obligate the reviewer to be favorable towards them. Another poster had said that earlier & they are right.

I also don't know where the word bribery came from. That's not what I've suggested. Offering up incentives in hopes they get a favorable review is different than offering up incentives with the expectation of getting favorable reviews.

I don't even think it's being done on a large scale. It's just commonplace.
 
If there is one band that doesn't need to pay reviewers, it's Maiden. I doubt a band with their fortunes, consistency and massive following would even bother.
 
Does anyone seriously think Maiden are paying for good reviews? LOL

Some mags might be too cowardly to give Maiden bad reviews, but there's no way Maiden are actually paying anyone.

Thankfully threads do not produce smell 'cos the amount of shit I've been reading is ultrageous! 265 pages and you can count the pages where people are actually discussing what's known about the album up to this moment. And the crap is always expeled by the same idiots.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top