I guess he's done badmouthing every other band on the planet so he's started criticizing his own band's legacy.
Maybe someday he'll reach the point where he actually looks in the mirror...
 
http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/bruce-dickinson-first-iron-maiden-album-sounded-like-a-sack-of-****/
 
Not like anything they put out since Martin Birch retired in the 90s sounds any good either...
 
It's funny to see how Dickinson claimed that he had no time for social media s**t a few days a go - I guess he's happy updating his statuses by proxy and letting the press type his daily does of inane drivel for him. What an annoying, detestable bloke he seems to be...
 
 

Bruce puts the "Dick" in Dickinson.

I'm not a huge fan of the post-Birch album productions, but he does have a point. That first album did sound pretty terrible, done on a tiny budget and the band were pretty green at the time.
 
That's not an statement on the material or playing at all, mind you. The fact that these guys still play songs from that album now kind of suggests they thing it's a good album, but just sounds awful. I tend to agree - I'm a huge fan of the first album and even dig the "crapness" of the production, but as a producer myself, I can't really argue when anyone says it sounds awful.

seems a perfectly reasonable interview. he says Steve Harris hates the sound on the album, and that there was no punk in Maiden's sound at all...not sure what the issue is?
I also agree that a lot of the new albums sound sterile and lifeless, AMOLAD wasn't even mastered cos Steve liked the sound of the mix...fortunately the new one is pretty good production-wise and has some great songs on it- maybe cos Steve isn't the main songwriter on this one? certainly my fave of the post-reunion albums.
Mind you, I put on Somewhere in Time last week, god I love that album, the riffs, the vocals, the production is awesome...

I'm getting 'page doesn't exist' from the link.

same here

Hi,
 
My friend says that their album, that just came out, is probably their best ... hmmm ... is it time to listen to it, yet?

Are we talking the FIRST IM album or the first one with Bruce (NOTB)?
 
I actually love the sound of NOTB even though it's definitely "lo fi" by today's standards. It's very warm, human and real. You can hear everything in balance and it sounds like a "band" not a bunch of disparate sounds mixed together and maximized.
 
TBH the stuff they did after that, although musically great, turns me off because of the sheer crispness/perfection of the production. Those albums sound like the studio... not the band. HOWEVER those albums also have a production quality I FAR prefer to almost everything else coming out of studios at the time. For example you can actually hear the damned bass (a rarity in that era of metal albums) and all the instruments are nice and full (whereas other albums were kind of thin and mosquitoey).
 
The REALLY early stuff (pre NOTB) though should really be taken for what they are. Demo's of a unique band performing a unique new style of music (and that band in particular were even unique within that new genre). I don't think even the top producers really would have known what to do with something like that at the time.
 
Also back then they were a LOT sloppier than they became (but still really good comparitively).
 
I do like those albums for sure and I'm probably an outlier as far as my ears/taste in metal sounds but they are pretty low rent. As a massive fan of early punk though that rawness certainly is part of the charm for me.
 
Now a CRAPPY sounding album, to me, is Metallica's Kill 'em All. Horrible sounding record but I still like it. Their production values after that (up to and even including And Justice which would be my FAVORITE Metallica record if not for the lack of bass... Newstead got a raw deal on that) were right up my alley. Warm, full and tight without losing that "band" feel. Black album and beyond... sounds like the studio. Blech... (and I won't even go into my thoughts on the music itself).
 
But as I said I like punk and actually most of my favorite recordings are well produced live performances.
 
I just like to listen to bands, warts and all, over "albums".
 
Meh... without reading the interview I can't form an opinion on what he said. I like Bruce but he is a bit pompous at times. He is however highly intelligent, educated and accomplished so in some ways I guess he can get away with a bit of that.
 
Still doesn't negate the fact he kind of sings like Ethel Merman... which still makes me snicker as I listen to them ever since someone pointed that out to me. lulz

Hi,
 
Nice writeup Beepster ... I think I'll check a couple of things on the tube (not my style as I like to listen to the whole album kinda thing!) ... and go from there.
 
Thanks

Hi, Moshie. It's all subjective of course and my tastes may be a little odd.
 
However if you go to their Wiki entry (or any band really) that of course will have discogrophies by year. Then when you head over to youtube search the band name, album name and add "Full Album" to the query. Generally you'll find the full record. Beware though some people REALLY suck at transferring/uploading music so there are lots of vids like that on youtube that sound way worse than the actual recordings. If there are multiple uploads I'll try a few different ones until I find one that sounds more like the original.
 
I actually usually own all these records anyway but it's just more convenient for me to listen on youtube instead of dragging them out of my various cd holder/case thingies or boxes crammed with cassettes. I also have better things to do than rip and manage all that crap.
 
I only feel bad listening to stuff I DON'T own but hey... when the money is flowing again those YT listening sessions contribute to me spazzing out a dropping money on things I like.