Why Adrian left?

____no5

____no5

Free Man
Details about Adrian's departure aren't very clear.
Bruce in his autobiography, barely touches the matter or better he is careful to mention it without saying anything of essence. On the internet same, very little info if any about what happened.
My understanding is that Adrian was unhappy with Steve's desire to go back to the roots, a stripped down sound, songs below 5 minutes and a less fantasy, more political approach to writing lyrics. Which again makes little sense, since Adrian up to that point was the writer with the most modern sound (and lyrics). Not to mention that up to now, he constantly praises the shorter songs.
So I'm starting this thread with the hope that some knowledgeable people could shed more light into this matter.
 
Here’s what he had to say in my interview with him (and Bruce) from 1997:

JER: First, what's the real story behind your exit from Iron Maiden...because the popular story is that you had some different musical ideas, so you left amicably to pursue that; but I've also heard stories that you had kind of a "discussion / argument" with Steve Harris about the number of songs to write for the album, and how they should be written, and that sort of thing, and that you didn't leave entirely willingly...

ADRIAN: There's probably a bit of truth in both, really. I mean, I did have other ideas, and I think deep down I did want to explore other things. I think basically I felt very stifled - I couldn't really express myself. I spent ten years, you know, I had some great times, and we did some good stuff, you know, but it was never...probably "Somewhere in Time" was the most expressive period. But I think deep down I felt that I needed to do something else, and the stuff we were working on for the album which I left on, I wasn't crazy about...and the manner in which we were going to record it, and the arrangements to some of the songs, I just...you know, I didn't up and quit, but I was less than enthusiastic, and, you know, the rest of the band...you know, "What's the matter? Do you want to be in the band or not?" And I said "well...", and once I expressed that, I thought that, everyone else was like... You know, I think it's sort of black and white when people quit, especially if you're in a band for ten years, you know...it's quite a decision, really. But, you know, I think it's been for the best, really. You know, I think I've managed to grow a lot as a person since I left the band. I didn't do anything for a couple of years - I think I needed to do nothing for a couple of years. And then I just started writing a lot, and I've done all kinds of different...well, not all kinds of different music; but I, like, explored different things, and I got a lot of stuff out of my system. But I'm really probably the happiest I've ever been playing music, like, you know, right now, like doing Bruce's thing and then having the outlet of Psycho Motel as well, you know, it's great.
 
Now that is.. Wow. Thanks @Jer!
Best part is that the interview is from 1997, which makes it super reliable of what Adrian had to say.

but I was less than enthusiastic, and, you know, the rest of the band...you know, "What's the matter? Do you want to be in the band or not?" And I said "well...", and once I expressed that, I thought that, everyone else was like...
Click to expand...

This ties the things together with what's said and how in Bruce's book. I understand better now. He was disenchanted with Steve basically and he needed to grow.
In retrospective Steve's decision to go back to basics was spot on and timely (see grunge) but
a) the songs were weak and uninspired b) there weren't any serious sonic overhaul. The change was only superficial, thus people didn't buy it.

I wonder if Bruce's raspy vocals for the 2 "blue" albums were part of that back-to-the-roots strategy or simply Bruce had a problem with his voice that period of time.
 
In the book he says the new direction for No prayer was decided by Steve and Bruce and he did not feel involved after contributing much to the last 2 albums. Or at least that's how I understood it
 
____no5 said:
In retrospective Steve's decision to go back to basics was spot on and timely (see grunge) but
a) the songs were weak and uninspired b) there weren't any serious sonic overhaul. The change was only superficial, thus people didn't buy it.

I wonder if Bruce's raspy vocals for the 2 "blue" albums were part of that back-to-the-roots strategy or simply Bruce had a problem with his voice that period of time.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say that the change was only superficial, because all songs are short and the sound and production are different from previous albums.

Regarding Bruce's vocals, maybe a combination of both.
 
Last edited:
I’m almost positive Bruce’s vocal approach was, at least mostly, fully intentional. He’d already been doing that style of vocal since his Tattooed Millionaire album and some of Maiden’s b-sides.

At the same time, his voice was definitely getting worn-in at the time. But if you listen close on the Donington and Real Live Dead One albums, there’s quite a few moments where “old Bruce” pops up, showing he could still hit those notes.

His vocal approach also made perfect sense considering the direction of the albums. They were harder edged and more rock and roll based. Bruce’s more operatic side wouldn’t have worked as well.

Lastly, while people point to Accident of Birth as the album where Bruce got his vocal-magic back, he’d actually been singing very well on Balls to Picasso. His operatic tenor is in full effect on some songs, and this came out only a year after Fear of the Dark.
 
Last edited:
chaosapiant said:
Lastly, while people point to Accident of Birth as the album where Bruce got his vocal-magic back, he’d actually been singing very well on Balls to Picasso. His operatic tenor is in full effect on some songs, and this came out only a year after Fear of the Dark.
Click to expand...

Yeap this is what makes me suspicious that it was intentional all along. Plus the way he signs is “biased” in my opinion, if I can use that expression: it sounds forced, not natural.
 
____no5 said:
Yeap this is what makes me suspicious that it was intentional all along. Plus the way he signs is “biased” in my opinion, if I can use that expression: it sounds forced, not natural.
Click to expand...
Yea, I think his solo album and the change of direction for those two Maiden albums sort of influenced his decision to sing with a bit of a rasp. Hell, there’s songs on both albums where he still drops that rasp, like the chorus to Tailgunner or Fear of the Dark. That’s tenor Bruce right there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top