The end of Maiden, as we knew it?

[Anonymous]

well this is my first post on this forum and i made this account purely to discuss this topic.

I have been a Maiden fan for some time now, and they are by far my favorite band. Though after hearing these new songs i am beggining to wonder if the Iron Maiden that we all knew is over. These new songs seem to be typical heavy metal songs, where as the original iron maiden had there own distinct sound (since i dont play guitar i couldnt tell u, though i now think they are mostly playing in d instead of whatever they used before).. the songs are getting longer and further away from what Steve Harris originally had in mind. Sure songs like "afraid to shoot strangers", or "fear of the dark" are great once in a while but changing the entire band to this new sort of music is just rubbish imho.. But since the album isnt out yet, i wont make any conclusions quite yet but this new album is probably going to be the album that stops me from listening to their new stuff. Though all bands change over the years, the ones that stayed on course with the same sound survived, like Maiden did all these long years, but now i fear that with this new album its really going to be the end, and im quite dissapointed/sad/depressed in that, since that was one of the main reasons i stayed with them. They never changed much, just with great new songs and guitar rifts, but always letting you know that they were the same old band that everyone knew and loved, for the most part...

so anyways just want to know what everyone thinks, and if anyone else shares the same concerns as i do..

 

[Anomica]

In my opinion, it's a good thing that a band that's been around for 30 years still is developing and renewing themselves. After all, it would be boring with a new BNW/Powerslave or whathaveyou. We have the treasure that is their old songs and now we get something slightly different, perhaps, but it's still very much Maiden IMHO. Listen, for example, on parts of Brighter than...when the "Maiden gallop" starts. Steve's base and Bruce's voice would make Maiden stand out even if they recorded covers of every big 80s metal band you could think of.

It's still Maiden and they make sure they're interesting. But, I can agree that the three new songs (apart from DW maybe) demand some active listening from you, since they're not immediately catchy. To me, that means that they may last that much longer. The hits usually grow boring after a couple of listenings, after all.

My 10 cents, anyway

 

[Onhell]

I think you are making too big of a deal out of it. It isn't the first time the band changes. Killers was vastly different from Iron Maiden, Number of the Beast was Vastly different from Killers, they changed again in SIT and SSOASS, then again in NPFTD, then again in The X Factor, they returned to their "golden era" sound in BNW, and these last two albums, DOD and AMOLAD are more "progressive.

As to what Steve "originally had in mind" is hard to say since he never wrote us a memo about it, just his songs. People change, the way they think, behave, etc. In artists, whether they paint, write literature or music this means a change in their work. Art, after all is about SELF EXPRESION. Picasso used to paint great pieces before he started making 5 year old doodles. Did he sell out? Did the "old" Picasso disappear? No, he just changed. Why should Maiden be held in a cage? Change is a sign of maturity (not all ways, but lets assume so in this case), So I welcome the change (unlike In Flames car wreck of change in direction, but that was their choice).

Personally I like the new songs and direction. Just think about it this way, are you the same person today than you were 5 years ago? 10? I hope the answer is an obvious "no," thus if you are not the same, why should Maiden be the same band of 5, 10 even 20 years ago?

I also think they just have one album left in them and then retire.

 

[Anonymous]

I'd strongly advise you to use a different nickname, as our resident grumpy old man already goes by the name of Maverick...

 

[Shadow]

I think it's great they're changing, My biggest fear for this album was that it would be the same old stuff repackaged with no changes in sound. True, the early albums were the best (except for The X Factor), but why go back to that sound now? It's the same mentality as the ones who don't like Blaze for being too different from Bruce. If all you want is a carbon copy of Powerslave there's always Powerslave there for you to listen to.

the songs are getting longer and further away from what Steve Harris originally had in mind.

How do you know what Steve "originally had in mind"? Forgive me if I'm wrong but I wouldn't say it's likely he was already planning thirty years ahead for the 14th studio album when he formed the band?

Though all bands change over the years, the ones that stayed on course with the same sound survived

Metallica, anyone? They might not have changed for good, but they damn well survived.

 

[Anonymous]

It all comes down to personal opinion and unfortunately for you, you lucked out!  Judging from the three songs previewed I haven't been this excited about the release of an Iron Maiden album since, well, Brave new World but the point is for me at least, aside from a couple of tracks Dance of Death was mostly a bore, really wanted to love it but didn't, but now... AMOLAD is sounding huge.  Bloody huge.  This dark and not too commercial path the band are taking is completely what I had hoped for.  Honestly I'm losing sleep about this and cannot wait to get this album. 

Sorry you feel the way you do and sure I get your point but to be honest my enthusiasm is back on track with this one, the change the band have endured over the years is completely acceptable if this is Maiden in the year 2006!  The Trooper / Wasted Years / The Evil TMD / Infinite Dreams / Out of the Silent Planet / Brighter than a Thousand Suns... and the rest, yep, all sound fucking classic to me no matter what era they're from!

I'm pumped and what I've heard so far sounds like PERFECT MAIDEN for 2006!

Bring it on!!!!!

 

[Forostar]

I think you are making too big of a deal out of it. It isn't the first time the band changes. Killers was vastly different from Iron Maiden

This is quite exagerated. I agree with the rest of your post but most of the Killers-songs were old left overs (some even older than the songs on Iron Maiden). The difference is a heavier production and Adrian Smith but for the rest this is not the best example to show different songwriting.

 

[Anonymous]

Maverick7, is the number in your name used as a reference to your age or brain cell count? Only joking.

I commend you on a good first post.  I don't agree with you however.  I think that Steve Harris deliberately tried to go with a more progressive approach but the Maiden "sound" hasn't gone away.  With all of these new songs, we can say "that section sounds like such and such a song."

"The Reincarnation of Benjamin Breeg" sounds a bit like Fortunes of War.
"Different World" sounds a bit like Rainmaker and the Wickerman.

To say that Maiden have lost their unique sound is not true.

 

[Anonymous]

Noooo. I don´t think this is the end of Maiden as we remember them. This is not a sellout.
They´ve just written a bit heavier songs than we´re used to.
I still have faith in the boys, I mean those three songs we heard were all excellent, and they hint that there are songs on AMOLAD that will shock people. 
Album release of the year? Oh yeah. 

 

[Raven]

I, as other posters before me, don't quite understand your logic.  Music is a flowing process-ideas come and go, some are held onto, others come back again.  We are all learning new things; I doubt Steve knows everything about playing the bass or writing songs, and he's always learning new things, and if you learn or discover something new that is different from what you've been doing for the last 10 years, you want to experiment with it.  And think of some of the finest epics the lads have penned; Paschendale was written when Adrian Smith saw a book about WWI.  Change is not a bad thing.  It has the potential to be brilliant, and I trust in Steve to know how much change is too much.  Maiden have, to me, been one of the most consistent bands of the metal scene, and the fact that they have had such a varied back catalogue while not losing the sound that defines them endears them to me a great deal.  I think you're exaggerating a great deal when you say the band has lost their sound.  Looking at their back catalgoue, a clear progression can be seen, with only a few creative gaps when the band shifted between Powerslave/SiT and FotD/X Factor.  And besides, music cannot be allowed to stagnate, and if you do want another Piece of Mind, you have the disc, so listen to it!  No-one's forcing you to listen to the new album-you don't have to like it!  But, at the very least, give it a chance before you prophesy Maiden's demise.

 

[Onhell]

This is quite exagerated. I agree with the rest of your post but most of the Killers-songs were old left overs (some even older than the songs on Iron Maiden). The difference is a heavier production and Adrian Smith but for the rest this is not the best example to show different songwriting.

Hmm, You are right Forostar. There isn't as big a jump as there is in there other "changes", however, even if the songs were left overs or older songs, they are a big improvement songwrittingwise. To me, Killers is a far better album than Iron Maiden, it is less punk and more metal and of course as you said heavier. But I admit I might be exagerating by saying "vastly different". I take it back, I should have simply said it was different, with out a qualifying degree.

 

[Pineapple Hunter]

Bands evolve and change with age and time. Do you expect to get a 50 year old whos seen the world to write the same music he did when he was 20 or so?

 

[Anonymous]

the songs are getting longer and further away from what Steve Harris originally had in mind.

Yeah right, they never had long songs in the past...
Phantom of the Opera
Hallowed be Thy Name
Powerslave            
Rime of the Ancient Mariner
Alexander the Great
Seventh Son of a Seventh Son

 

[Pineapple Hunter]

Yeah right, they never had long songs in the past...
Phantom of the Opera
Hallowed be Thy Name
Powerslave              
Rime of the Ancient Mariner
Alexander the Great
Seventh Son of a Seventh Son

Yeah, but the songs you mentioned were on albums with shorter songs around them. Not an entire album of nothing under 4 minutes.

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, but the songs you mentioned were on albums with shorter songs around them. Not an entire album of nothing under 4 minutes.

1. Aces High 04:33
2. 2 Minutes to Midnight 06:03
3. Losfer Words (Big 'Orra) 04:16
4. Flash of the Blade 04:05
5. The Duellists 06:07
6. Back in the Village 05:03
7. Powerslave 07:12
8. Rime of the Ancient Mariner 13:39

1. Different Worlds (Smith/Harris) 4.17
2. These Colours Don't Run (Smith/Harris/Dickinson) 6.52
3. Brighter Than a Thousand Suns (Smith/Harris/Dickinson) 8.44
4. The Pilgrim (Gers/Harris) 5.07
5. The Longest Day (Smith/Harris/Dickinson) 7.48
6. Out Of the Shadows (Dickinson/Harris) 5.36
7. The Reincarnation of Benjamin Breeg (Murray/Harris) 7.21
8. For The Greater Good of God (Harris) 9.24
9. Lord Of Light (Smith/Harris/Dickinson) 7.23
10. The Legacy (Gers/Harris) 9.20


Sorry, but I don't see a big difference, except 2 more songs.

 

[SinisterMinisterX]

With all due respect, and I honestly don't mean to sound rude here:
If you want to listen to a band that never changes from one album to the next, go invest in some post-"Back In Black" AC/DC.
If you want to listen to a band that refuses to entirely rest on their laurels, listen to Iron Maiden.

Sure, sometimes they milk their past. GEMTID was a prime example, although it was a great show. But when they follow up tours like that or Early Days 1 with new material that takes chances, I forgive them completely.

As far as the debate of short vs. long songs, I've already stated my point of view on other threads but I'll say it again anyway. I LOVE the long songs. In my opinion, it takes much more skill to hold a listener's attention for 8 minutes than for 3 minutes. I LOVE progressive, complex music. I recognize some Maiden fans like the shorter and simpler songs; if that's your preference, more power to you. But I eagerly anticipate this album full of long and complex songs.

 

[Anomica]

As far as the debate of short vs. long songs, I've already stated my point of view on other threads but I'll say it again anyway. I LOVE the long songs. In my opinion, it takes much more skill to hold a listener's attention for 8 minutes than for 3 minutes. I LOVE progressive, complex music. I recognize some Maiden fans like the shorter and simpler songs; if that's your preference, more power to you. But I eagerly anticipate this album full of long and complex songs.

I can only agree. If a song is great I don't want it to end, just like a great book - I prefer a 1000-page book to a 300-page one, as long as the book is indeed good. When I listen to songs like ROTAM or Brighter than... I'm actually somewhat disappointed when they end, but maybe I'm just strange :wacko:

 

[Forostar]

Hmm, You are right Forostar. There isn't as big a jump as there is in there other "changes", however, even if the songs were left overs or older songs, they are a big improvement songwrittingwise. To me, Killers is a far better album than Iron Maiden, it is less punk and more metal and of course as you said heavier. But I admit I might be exagerating by saying "vastly different". I take it back, I should have simply said it was different, with out a qualifying degree.

No prob!

Myself, I really admire the instrumental sections on the debut (Prowler, Remember Tomorrow, Transylvania and Phantom of the Opera) more than most of such sections on Killers. Of course, I should not forget the beautiful stuff on e.g. Prodigal Son, Genghis Khan and The Ides of March.


About the short/long songs thing:

On the last couple of albums Maiden didn't have so many great short songs (exceptions imo are e.g. Futureal, Lightning Strikes Twice and Rainmaker) as they earlier had. How come?

It's like making meals.

It's difficult to always make a very nice meal with only a couple of ingredients. Since most "ingredients" in the short songs have been used already it's hard to keep sounding fresh after 30 years!

However, most long songs on the last couple of albums were pretty good! There are many good ones on The X-Factor and Brave New World. Also, Dance of Death and Paschendale are amongst the best songs of DOD.

Conclusion: At the moment, Maiden is simply doing what they are good at.: Long songs! With all the background info in mind I am not afraid of it.