WHY did they strip-down the sound for No Prayer??

averycopeland

averycopeland

Invader
Has anyone ever heard exactly WHY the band decided to "strip down" their sound for the NO PRAYER album??

Whenever I read about this period in books or articles, the explanation seems to be glossed over.
Sure, I understand that they wanted to go against the epic nature of their previous few albums-- but why??

My theory is that they desperately wanted to "make it big" in the elusive American singles market ...
and since many straight-forward Hard Rock and Hair Glam bands were accomplishing this at the time,
they hoped to fit into the same mold and garner similar success. Unfortunately, however, it just didn't happen.

Of course, they would probably never candidly admit this motivation since it would likely brand them as wannabe "sell-outs".
So, ironically, maybe their failure achieving this short-term goal actually strengthened their artistic credibility long-term.
 
Oh... and while I am on the topic of cynical theories...

I contend that Maiden picked Blaze to be their frontman in the mid-90s
solely because his baritone voice was comparable to all those fashionable grunge singers (in America) at the time
and the band was desperately trying to remain relevant during that precarious point in their existence.
 
averycopeland said:
My theory is that they desperately wanted to "make it big" in the elusive American singles market ...
and since many straight-forward Hard Rock and Hair Glam bands were accomplishing this at the time,
they hoped to fit into the same mold and garner similar success. Unfortunately, however, it just didn't happen.
Click to expand...

All those hard rock and glam bands had been having US hits for many years beforehand. It doesn't make sense that they'd be trying to jump on a trend that's already several years old, being practiced by bands who open for Maiden when it's time to play live.

I think it's far more likely that the band (or at least Steve) just wanted to try something new. It's what musicians do. There's no ulterior motive necessary.
 
I actually see it as part of the other emerging trend in music and popular culture at the time, the 'back to basics' one. Funnily enough, that was a rejection of OTT peak-80s stuff. I don't know how far that went in the US, but it was quite big in the UK. The mainstream Top 40 music chart was transformed. Manufactured pop and extravagant music was suddenly fighting it out with relatively grass roots energetic dance acts and off-the-wall 'Madchester'-style indie bands who sounded like they were playing in their dad's garage (they probably were). Hair metal became hilariously embarrassing and was much derided. The only hard rock band that was still cool was GNR.

Maiden weren't the most ostentatious act of the 80s, even if they threw in embellishments around the time of SIT, but I think they'd got a lot of that out of their system by this stage and wanted to do something different. They risked becoming a lingering dinosaur of the previous decade and a bit of a self-parody if they'd carried on in the same direction. I distinctly remember hearing FOTD and being vaguely aware that this band was now officially legendary - it had triumphantly made it out of the 80s and was still as cool as ever.
 
In the end, I think to Steve Harris, who has never seemed an Americophile to the extent of Nicko or Dave, what was happening in the UK was probably infinitely more important than what is happening in the USA. I think what Brig says is true - we're looking at a reflection of the "back to basics" sort of mentality. "Alright, blokes, the 80s are over, let's remember where we came from."
 
I think part of it is just natural progression. The members themselves growing up and getting kids, settling down more. Also the world in the 1990 had a lot to do with it, many dark and serious events which obviously had an impact on the lyrics.

That being said though, I think they did try to do a commercial push, at least with Fear of The Dark. For example by hiring the guy who did the Smells Like Teen Spirit music video to do the video for Wasting Love.
 
Or by writing Wasting Love in the first place.
 
It's not a bad song but that was all Bruce and what he wanted to do...Not so much fitting for Maiden to go 100% in that direction. Which is also why Bruce went solo I guess :D There's more stuff like Wasting Love on his first solo album, Change of Heart, Tears of The Dragon etc.
 
No Prayer is the most recent album I've purchased, in order, and I've listened to it a fair amount to start commenting on it.
They very clearly wanted to follow in the footsteps of other glam rock bands that were ironically influenced by bands like Iron Maiden. They wanted to be another late 80s/early 90s anthem rock band and their attempt at doing so failed miserably. They became the crap that I had thought Iron Maiden was better than and what distinctly set them apart from the Judas Priest/Def Leppard/ACDCs of the world.
With that being said, the album does have a handful of decent songs. No amazing songs and that is its biggest flaw.
It's tied with Killers as the worst album so far. I can't decide which I dislike more. Killers might be a touch better.
 
Iron Maiden: wannabe sell outs . That's where you lost me. I'll agree there was a certain degree of misstepping done at the time. But the nature of this crew is not to follow.
I have viewed it as more of experimentation . I don't believe there was a particular outside entitiy influencing a change in style. I won't except they were mimicking glam rock. Please. It was an excersize in diversity by a band that was fracturing internally. Hence a different sounding, perhaps slightly less "maidenesque" sound. Still awesome.
 
Last edited:
I don't hear any glam/hair metal in it at all.

And I don't hear Sabaton either, I have to add.
 
A little more in common with generic/hard rock, I could accept that, but not the high kitsch of hair metal.
 
I'm glad you brought up holy smoke. It is a response I might use in lue of profanity when responding to this thread. The song itself reminding one of the legendary heavy band AC/DC is not by any stretch an argument for the comparison to hair or glam rock .

Bring your daughter is my least favorite, non-blaze song the band ever came out with. However it is just a poor example of a slow sleezy rock song. It's dirty and dark and in no way to be compared with glam. I'm not seeing it. Look, the album was a slight disappointment on the heels of the previous string of masterpieces. But it was the bands' own direction and as said before, a result of a less cohesive unit trying something new. Original....but new. Not a ripoff or any Bandwaggoning on a trend.
 
Oh it's cheesy. But so too are lyrics off of just about all maiden albums. Some lyrics will come off that way. It comes with the genre/subject matter. Can you envision Bruce, Steve et al. Contemplating these words and saying,; " hmmmm, these cheesy lyrics will make us sound more like skid row!"? No way. It just didn't work exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top