I've listened through The Book Of Souls four or five times since I got it, and I must say, I agree with Mark. For me, the songwriting isn't necessarily 'better' per se, but it is definitely more varied.
 
Steve Harris is a great songwriter, I've always been inspired by his 'epics' - long story-telling songs with a number of tempo changes and the occasional, deftly handled, change of direction mid-tune. But maybe you can have too much of a good thing?
 
I must be honest, I'm not altogether sold on the production though. On the plus side, Nicko's drums do sound better than they have for a while. On the down side, the bass guitar doesn't seem to have any presence in the mix for my ears (talking about pre-Dickinson albums, compare the bass on TBOS to the bass sound on Killers - even when Harris plays his trademark high runs and flourishes the bass still has power and presence in the mix).
 
I have to say I'm not over-impressed with the guitar sound either. I do appreciate that it must be a bugger to mix three rhythm guitars into a coherent sound, but the guitars sound like a bit of a mid-range mush to me. There's a clarity, or separation, I'm not quite getting I'm afraid. And all three sound very similar, so without looking it up, it's almost impossible to tell who's taking which solo, sometimes it's only the individual players' little idiosyncrasies that even slightly betray who's doing what.
 
To ensure it wasn't just me hearing (or not) things, earlier today I listened to Priest's Redeemer Of Souls straight after TBOS and for me, the difference is remarkable. Ritchie and Glenn's rigs just sound so much better in the mix than the Maiden boys' do. And they do sound completely different to each other, so it's obvious which one is soloing; plus of course when they are trading solo passages, their parts are panned to the same side as their rhythm parts. It's also nice to hear the separation of tones when they are both playing rhythm - Faulkner's sound being generally more trebly (as was KK's) than Tipton's. I think I referred to this in a previous thread (when the album came out) when I bemoaned the fact that Glenn's solos didn't seem to be as loud as Ritchie's.
 
As far as the first Iron Maiden album goes, it is their best album as far as I'm concerned. The songwriting was a revelation at the time, and the tempo changes were something we'd only heard regularly in prog rock up to that point (cue Pedro ). So the production is a bit on the thin side. So what? It's a collection of great songs and a seminal release in the then burgeoning NWOBHM (New Wave Of British Heavy Metal). Incidentally, Geoff Barton deserves an award for the worst anonym in history (WAH!) for coining that mouthful
 
Having seen Maiden before they released their eponymous debut, it was obvious then that they were going to be enormous. I suppose that's why I'm a bit biased when it comes to picking a favourite album, but I suppose it's just the fact that you were there at the start, and hearing those songs live before they even cut a record makes you feel somehow part of it all I guess. Same for me with the debut Clash album. Production-wise (even after Mick Jones' recent and quite superb remastering job) it sounds like it was recorded in a shed, with Simonon playing through a transistor radio speaker, but the songs, and what the album meant, all mean more than the studio budget they recorded it on.
 
More thoughts to come, but my stir-fry awaits

 Chris on a bike, how short is the silent edit time these days

SteveStrummerUK
 Chris on a bike, how short is the silent edit time these days

Non existent. They had fixed it for about a week then it reverted back to instantaneous. It's some weird setting in the forum software only the Baker's can set and apparently has some quirks. The original statement was something about the software resetting it all on its lonesome (without Admin input) so I guess aside from someone with full permissions tweaking it regularly we may be stuck until the software provider fixes it (and we go through another forum update which will likely introduce new and potentially more annoying issues).
 
It tweaks me a little too but that's just because I'm a bit of an OCD spazzo so I keep that in mind and try to ignore it.
 
On topic though... I really should listen to the newer albums. To be perfectly honest I haven't listened to any new Maiden since probably the mid to late 90's. Not even sure what's been released in that time.
 
I am a BAD fan... aren't I?
 
*shame*

 

Beepster
 
On topic though... I really should listen to the newer albums. To be perfectly honest I haven't listened to any new Maiden since probably the mid to late 90's. Not even sure what's been released in that time.

Just my opinion Beep, but I haven't been overly impressed with any of their studio albums since Fear Of The Dark. The two albums with Blaze Bayley certainly had some good stuff on them, and I actually welcomed the change of vocalist. Bruce Dickinson has always been, in my opinion anyway, the third best vocalist Maiden have had. As a brief aside, when me and SidStrummerUK went to see Saxon a couple of years back in Wolverhampton, the support act were Wolfsbane (of who I knew very little until Mark [mgh] shared some of his immense metal knowledge with me ) and their lead singer was one Blaze Bayley. I have to say, he was an incredible front man, albeit a complete nutter!
 
Brave New World was always going to be a popular album as far as the majority of Maiden fans, with Bruce Dickinson and Adrian Smith welcomed back into the fold. For me though, it was very much 'same old, same old' I'm afraid. As have been the subsequent albums, Dance Of Death, A Matter Of Life And Death and (the awful) The Final Frontier for that matter.
 
My first impressions of The Book Of Souls are much more favourable in comparison. And maybe it's just me regarding the overall production, who knows  But the songs are good. Very good actually. The sort of songs you're happy to listen to again and again. I'll be honest, I listened to The Final Frontier three or four times, and I haven't played it since. TBOS is definitely going to get plenty of listens, that's for sure.
 
Incidentally, going back to the production, one thing's for certain, Maiden have never released a badly produced live album. Right back to the wonderful Live After Death double LP (which I still have somewhere!), it's difficult to fault their live sound, and how well and how consistently that's been captured.
 
In fact Beep, you could do much worse than listening to Death on the Road (2005), which contains cracking live renditions of some of the better material from The X-Factor, Dance Of Death and Brave New World, interspersed as you'd expect, with a healthy dollop of classics.
 
 

Thanks for the suggestions, Steve. Really I think my biggest problem keeping on top of newer releases of the old bands I love (especially the metal guys) was just total flop-a-ramas through the nineties and beyond. It's like everyone was trying too hard or lost their spirit and the producers/labels trashed whatever good was still there. Of course everyone had moved on to other sonic pursuits too. I've probably missed out on some hidden gems because of all that.
 
The only really consistent hard hitters to me I'd get excited about new releases from that never (usually) disappointed me were from Slayer and Motorhead.
 
Funny thing is I wasn't actually into those two bands back in the day. I thought they were TOO nuts, noisy and crazy as young greaser. I didn't get it. Now... I so tooootally get it. lulz
 
Cheers.

Book of Souls is in the mail on its way to me - because I have to learn a song for a project my wife and I are working on.
 
 
And because, Adrian Smith. The man is the David Gilmour of heavy metal, as far as I'm concerned.
 
I've pre-auditionned it on Itunes and I detested the production once again. IMHO, Steve Harris should step out of the producer chair.
 
Fear of the Dark is the last Maiden album that sounded okay to me - even then, it was nowhere near as impressive as the older stuff. 
 
As for the first Maiden album... Obviously it doesn't have the sonic impact that the follow-ups have, it very sterile sounding, a bit limp... But I've heard worst. 
 
I'd listen to the first Maiden all day whereas I can't get past the first cut on Final Frontier (yeah, that one with terrible edits that cause subtle timing issues - like there's an excuse for that in the days of digital editing...) or anything they've put out since (and including) Brave New World.

being a member of the Terrorizer forum, one of our fave things to do is rate discographys, and Maiden's gets done pretty often, so:
IM - 4.5 (out of 5)
Killers - 5
NOTB - 5
POM-  4.5
Power - 4.5
SIT - 5
SSOASS - 5
NPFTD-  3
FOTD - 4
(something happened here..)
BNW - 3.5
DOD - 2.5
AMOLAD - 4
TFF - 3
TBOS - 4.5

I do find that there's a punk edge to those first albums w/ DiAnno - an element of aggression, a few songs w/ faster tempo, not to mention the topics of the songs. Far from the history lessons of Alexander the Great or the adaptation of classic English poetry such as Rime of the Ancient Mariner...
 
The level of sophistication is closer to street smarts than literature clubs. 
 
Obviously, Dickinson HATES punk, so what HE associates with it is bound to be detestable to him. Punk saved rock and roll, forcing it to get its head out of its pretentious butt w/ all the long-winded jams and solos, and to become abrasive and relevant again. It was about to become old people music.

Rain
I do find that there's a punk edge to those first albums w/ DiAnno - an element of aggression, a few songs w/ faster tempo, not to mention the topics of the songs. Far from the history lessons of Alexander the Great or the adaptation of classic English poetry such as Rime of the Ancient Mariner...
 
The level of sophistication is closer to street smarts than literature clubs. 
 
Obviously, Dickinson HATES punk, so what HE associates with it is bound to be detestable to him. Punk saved rock and roll, forcing it to get its head out of its pretentious butt w/ all the long-winded jams and solos, and to become abrasive and relevant again. It was about to become old people music.

Indeed. DiAnno definitely had the street hood vibe. Dickinson the pseudo intellectual vibe.
 
I can appreciate and relate to both.
 
I don't think Maiden could have scrounged their way up from street level without DiAnno and I don't think they could have refined themselves enough to acheive stadium level without the "Dick".
 
Kind of like what would Metallica have been without Mustaine? What would they have been if they kept him? My answer would be... not anywhere near what they DID become.
 
As far as punk... anyone who denies the punk movement had a direct influence on the creation of metal was either born too late or still hold the old street beefs to the point of zealotry.
 
I was born too late so never saw the progression. I know better now.

And if you go to any metal show now you'll likely see a few Mohawks. Conversely you go to any punk show now and you'll likely see a few old thrash/metal band shirts and long hairs with cut off denim vests over a leather jacket.
 
These are the young kids too. Fookin' brilliant to see. When I saw my first hardcore punk band that REALLY moved me (I thought it was all three chord bullsh*t played by junkies up until that moment) I was HOOKED. That was before metalheads and punks were really crossing over but kind of sort of after the street beefs of the 80's had died down.
 
It was all uphill from there. The young kids are doing some CRAZY stuff now that you will never hear because it's all underground.