THe History of (80's) Iron Maiden in Chart Form

M

MHStrawn

Prowler
I hope this isn't breaking the rules as this is my first post. I read the guidelines and it seems like it should be okay; if not I apologize in advance.

I was a huge fan of Iron Maiden in the 80's and generally lost track of them after that. I've always enjoyed listening to that era of their music, however and think fondly of that time in my life when Maiden was my favorite band.

I've created a web site and recently added a post dedicated to the 80's era of the band. I hope you'll check it out:

http://lifeismusic.me/2015/11/03/the-history-of-80s-iron-maiden-in-chart-form/

Here's a preview of one of the charts

2. Summary Chart.jpg
 
Welcome MHStrawn!

What a work! While I am impressed by all the work I can't resist to utter some criticism (just my 2 cents, hope you don't mind).

I find the view on live albums rather limited. They are more than simply being repetitions. There are different players, (subtle) variations in execution (e.g. guitar lines, solos), well, basically there's enough to discover.

Also the whole idea of how someone, who's so much into this period, totally lacks interest (that contrast!) in what happened in the next two and a half decades, I have some trouble with understanding that attitude and I get a bit defiant of it. ;)

The idea that the last few albums from the eighties are not original enough to like them as much as earlier stuff: I do not share that opinion. Well, of course, when Maiden were new on the scene, they brought something new! How to beat that! But they developed and wandered into some different areas. Should they have done more different stuff? And I find their mid to late eighties quite adventurous!

I can't believe what I read about Somewhere in Time: "a dull, uninteresting affair, with no standout songs and a number of embarrassingly bad songs."
Maybe some more appreciation (or feel) for melody and musicianship is needed to like this album? I find it full of memorable melodies and the band played at their top.

The ranking system for albums: Pulling time into it (like you do) is an interesting idea.
 
Last edited:
Forostar said:
What a work! While I am impressed by all the work I can't resist to utter some criticism (just my 2 cents).

I find the view on live albums rather limited. They are more than simply being repetitions. There are different players, (subtle) variations in execution (e.g. guitar lines, solos), well, basically there's enough to discover.

Also the whole idea of how someone, who's so much into this period, totally lacks interest (that contrast!) in what happened in the next two and a half decades, I have some trouble with understanding that attitude and I get a bit defiant of it. ;)

The idea that the last few albums from the eighties are not original enough to like them as much as earlier stuff: I totally do not share that opinion. I find their mid to late eighties quite adventurous!

I can't believe what I read about Somewhere in Time: "a dull, uninteresting affair, with no standout songs and a number of embarrassingly bad songs."
Maybe some more appreciation (or feel) for melody and musicianship is needed to like this album, honestly. It's full of memorable melodies and the band played at their top.

The ranking system for albums: Pulling time into it (like you do) is an interesting idea. I always felt that songs have equal importance, no matter the length, so I am not sure if I'd be inclined to do that myself.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. And the criticisms you level I understand. I've had long-running discussions with old friends of mine regarding Iron Maiden. My experience with the band is unlike any other where I went from being a huge, devoted fan to losing virtually all interest.

The thing is...it's not like I ever decided I didn't like them; I STILL like them. I bought the 666 video and the live show was tremendous and I have warm feelings for everyone in the band (well, except maybe Nicko; always liked Clive's drumming better). But I have tried listening to the later stuff on many occassion. Earlier this week I fired up Souls on Spotify. There was a lot of good stuff (especially the guitar work) but I found it draining...after about an hour I had to turn it off.

And that always seems to be my experience. I want to like; I try to like...I get worn out.

Regarding SIT...I know I'm very much running counter to general opinions on that album. But to me there's no energy; everything is mid-tempo. And everything is REPEATED OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER. Guitar lines are run four times...then the whole thing is run four times again. The chorus of every songs is usually the title repeated four times. It's truly monotonous to me. Add the fact that everything done on SIT sounds like it had been done sometime before by the band.....I'll admit my feeling don't match those of most fans but it is how I genuinely feel.

But again, thatnks for checking it out.
 
You're welcome!

Re: SIT

Interesting how you look into this album in numbers, while I focus more on how I enjoy what's going on. Naturally, if I did not like the content much, I'd also count how often it happens. The thing is, I do like what I hear (well most of it), so I do not bother much with a few repetitions of lines.

But is everything done in mid tempo? There are various rhythms and tempo's. Maybe you miss a really fast song? And I do not recognize a thing that was done before by the band.

edit:
So, I am still mystified. I understand there's a strong feeling, but to be honest, I am curious if you could mention a moment that sounds as if it was already done before.

Where's that deja-vu? :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top