The Case Against Accident of Birth
Rick Cavalla
I've been wondering a lot lately about why I dislike AoB so much. I bought
the album last Spring and shelled out a lot of money for the import. I
didn't want to wait for the domestic release; I was quite fond of
SkunkWorks, disappointed with X-Factor, and thought that AoB was going to
kick some major ass. I put it into the CD player, cranked it up, and was
totally underwhelmed. I didn't hate the album, but I wasn't hooked on the
first listen.
That was OK. I have many records that I didn't like on the first
listen, but grew to love. That didn't happen with AoB. Every time I
listened to it was the same. I was waiting for the songs to grow on me, for
hidden subtleties to expose themselves. Further listenings were futile
though. AoB was WYHIWYG (What You Hear Is What You Get). There was nothing
in the songs that required previous listens to reveal, no underlying
structure that could only be appreciated when viewed from the ears of
experience. I was amazed by how such a heavy record could be so shallow.
Basically, AoB is just the Bruce Dickinson show. His singing is quite
good (although not on par with 7th Son or even the surprisingly dynamic
Skunkworks). However, the rest of the disc is very bland and generic. I
think that if you grabbed a group of studio musicians for a movie soundtrack
and told them "make it really metal", AoB is along the lines of what you'd
get. It really sounds like some guy (with little knowledge of metal)
listened to a couple of Black Sabbath and Judas Priest albums, threw
together some power chords, and thinks he's written the mother of all metal
albums.
The album is far too power-chord oriented. Obviously, Iron Maiden use
their fair share of power chords, but the Maiden albums that Bruce/Roy Z.
are trying to emulate have depths of variation and musical interaction that
are light years beyond this. The rhythm section is competent (at best);
they do nothing wrong but they don't do anything particularly right either.
Like all facets of this album, it's played safe. Which leads me to my main
complaint.
AoB sounds like a product. I hear nothing in this album that gives any
indication that the people involved are doing anything more than going
through the motions. Say what you will about Balls To Picasso / SkunkWorks,
but Roy Z. and (especially) Alex Dickson sounded like they were into the
music. With AoB I hear music that is straining to be something that the
people involved probably aren't all that into. Did Roy Z., whatz-his-name,
and the-other-guy really want to create rehashed 80's metal at this point in
their careers? Probably not (any comments to the effect of "What careers?"
will be chuckled at but largely ignored).
Bruce seems to have seen his first two solo albums go nowhere, seen
Maiden lose a step with X-Factor, and seen a niche he could fill with
"traditional metal". It's obvious that Bruce is obsessed with showing up
Steve Harris. I think he expected Maiden to fall to pieces when he left and
that his solo career would skyrocket; then he'd have his revenge on Steve
Harris for being a "tyrant" and "limiting" Bruce musically. How co-writing
10 of 22 songs on NPFTD and FOTD is being "limited" by a "tyrant", I don't
know. =) Nonetheless, the style of this album seems to have more to do with
Bruce's psychological hangups than a true, heartfelt desire to return to
traditional metal.
Of course, Steve's selection of Blaze probably had something to do with
psychological hangups left by Bruce's unprofessional departure, but that's a
completely different topic. Besides, Maiden have made something of a return
to form with VXI, so I think 'Arry has put Bruce behind him and moved on.
Bruce will NEVER to be able to put Steve Harris behind him as long he
continues to try to write Steve Harris songs.
Anyway, on to the production of AoB. Yuck. It's got this fuzzy,
wall-of-sound thing going on that I don't care for at all. Crank this one
up in your car. I find the guitars make my stomach hurt more than my ears
which is something I associate more with alternative or rap than heavy
metal. The bass and drums just sit there. Not completely buried in the
mix, but not brought forward because there's nothing to show off, no
passages where the rhythm section does more than keep a beat.
Bruce dumped his talented (but unpopular) SkunkWorks mates, grabbed a
Bunch Of NoNames ... err ... I mean Tribe Of Gypsies, and told them his
"vision" for his next product. "Rather than portraying Steve Harris as out
of touch, I'll outdo him at his own game. Steve has stumbled and this is my
chance!" Bruce forgot something though. He can't write the kind of music
that Steve Harris and Dave Murray do. He was always more of the provacative
lyric guy. Well, Roy Z. sure as hell has no idea how to write an Iron
Maiden song and that's why this album sounds more like Sabbath/Priest than
Iron Maiden. It's not Roy Z.'s fault. This isn't his style, and you can't
expect him to have the kind of passion and subtlety of expression that it
demands.
As for Adrian Smith, he came along far too late to make any difference.
Judging by Hooks In You, ASAP, Psycho Motel, etc., Adrian can't write Iron
Maiden songs anymore either, so his contribution is irrelevant. Yeah, he's
a geat guitarist, but that's nothing special. It's Iron Maiden songs that
are special, and all the technical excellence in the world can't give him
the ability to write new ones. =(
Anyway, that's my thoughts on why I dislike AoB. Hopefully it's more
interesting than "cuz it sucks". Feel free to agree, disagree, comment,
whatever.
Rick Cavalla
ra...@NO.erols.SPAM.com
(remove NO and SPAM to e-mail)
==============
Currently listening to: Dark Tranquillity - The Mind's I
==============
"All around my silent moon,
Life suffers defeat..." - In Flames
Me
Bravo! I with your analysis 1000%.
My only difference, is that I liked AOB - at first. When I first bought it,
and threw it in the player, I was excited! "Wow, this is what Maiden could be
sounding like now!!".
And then I listened to it again. And was disturbed by something I couldn't put
my finger on. And so I listened again, and there it was. It was crap. It was
rehashed, 80's metal (which I happen to like, but this is the 90's and were
almost at the end of this decade too!) with the same old gimmicks and gadgets,
the same tired lyrical content, and the same *old* Bruce Dickinson. I felt
cheated. I'd been had. Bruce stole my money and ran away laughing.
Like you, I too enjoyed Skunkworks. I think it's his only good work since he
left Maiden. But it didn't garner him the recognition he craves, so he changed
direction again. You can almost hear him thinking "What will make me some
money?" ch-ching!
As for Maiden, I like their newer sound. I hated X-Factor, at first, but it
grew on me. I listened to VXI with NO prejudice or expectation, and found that
I quite liked it. Maiden always has been and always will be true to
themselves. They have moved beyond the 80's. If VXI had sounded like Dickinson
sounding like Maiden, that would have been the last IM I'd have bought.
(Probably would have sold it back to the store like I did with "Load".)
My rant is done.
....Me .
DLewisGmnr
I think it does kick serious ass. Excellent guitars and vocal performance. But
I think it lags in one department--lyrics. 90% Satanic---dull, dull, dull. It's
been done to death and Bruce dwells on that one topic on almost every song. In
Maiden, he wrote about myths and history --much more original.
gmnr.
John Twynam
Rick Cavalla wrote:
>
> I've been wondering a lot lately about why I dislike AoB so much. I bought
> the album last Spring and shelled out a lot of money for the import. I
> didn't want to wait for the domestic release; I was quite fond of
> SkunkWorks, disappointed with X-Factor, and thought that AoB was going to
> kick some major ass. I put it into the CD player, cranked it up, and was
> totally underwhelmed. I didn't hate the album, but I wasn't hooked on the
> first listen.
That's the same way I felt. It took me several listens to start to like
AoB.
> That was OK. I have many records that I didn't like on the first
> listen, but grew to love.
Same here (for example, all of Maiden's albums.)
> The album is far too power-chord oriented. Obviously, Iron Maiden use
> their fair share of power chords,
Along with every single metal band (and many rock bands) that ever
existed. Power chords are practically the basis for any metal song, so I
don't see how a metal album can be TOO power chord oriented. Sure,
there's solos and harmony stuff here and there, but a lot of the time in
the background there is a guitar playing power chords. If not, there is
a bass line which implies power chords.
but the Maiden albums that Bruce/Roy Z.
> are trying to emulate have depths of variation and musical interaction that
> are light years beyond this. The rhythm section is competent (at best);
I think the bassist is pretty good. I really like his intro bass line to
Darkside Of Aquarius, and he has a few interesting bass lines on Balls
To Picasso.
I don't really have any opinion about the drummer. Sure, he's not bad,
but he doesn't really stand out as an excellent drummer. He's no Nicko
or Clive.
> Anyway, on to the production of AoB. Yuck. It's got this fuzzy,
> wall-of-sound thing going on that I don't care for at all. Crank this one
> up in your car. I find the guitars make my stomach hurt more than my ears
> which is something I associate more with alternative or rap than heavy
> metal. The bass and drums just sit there. Not completely buried in the
> mix, but not brought forward because there's nothing to show off, no
> passages where the rhythm section does more than keep a beat.
I like the sound on AoB. Granted, it has the more "produced" sound of
the 90's rather than the "raw" sound of the 80's, but that's ok.
I have cranked this up in my car. It sounds amazing to me.
--
征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫
John Twynam
Stil...@hotmail.com
http://www.bigfoot.com/~wratchild
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Towers/2920
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/8615
UIN (ICQ Number): 416719
征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫 征馬辰漫
Cyco
I figured out of your posting that you were expecting Bruce to do something
in maiden vein. And when it didn't happened you were dissappointed. That
just my opinion.
Now, you call AoB power chord-oriented I'd rather call it riff-oriented.
Being honestm maiden never had many powerfull riffs - mostly power chords,
galloping and guitar harmonies. And AoB has a loot of groovy stuff (and it
proves that it's 90's metal). Then, you miss some subtle stuff to be
reinvented. I like such records, but I like good straight-in-the-eye albums
also. And I like my guts to be massaged by a powerful grooves. And I must
mention that all the tracks on AoB while being straightforward is a very
diverse album in terms of songwriting.
clair...@webtv.net
I don't think it sounds like rehashed 80s metal at all. I think Bruce
took the basic idea of Maiden's sound, but he definately added a more
progressive touch to it. Case in point, Man of Sorrows; Arc of Space;
Omega; and Taking The Queen - all sound nothing like any IM song that I
can think of.
Jim
Rick Cavalla
ƒå†és Hånð wrote in message <6hrkbu$38h$1...@newsd-143.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
>YOUR A FUCKIN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for putting the same time and thought into your response as I put
into my original post. Love the grammer, BTW.
Rick Cavalla
ra...@NO.erols.SPAM.com
(remove NO and SPAM to e-mail)
==============
Currently listening to: Pestilence - Testimony of the Ancients
Steve/Joanne Kotsopoulos
>ƒå†és Hånð wrote in message <6hrkbu$38h$1...@newsd-143.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
>>YOUR A FUCKIN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>Thanks for putting the same time and thought into your response as I put
>into my original post. Love the grammer, BTW.
>
>Rick Cavalla
So, your post was about how much "thought" you put into it? I thought
metal was a visceral thing; it either gives you goosebumps or it
doesn't. It's not brain surgery.
BTW, as for Bruce trying to write "Harris stuff", the album has
nothing that sounds remotely like Maiden. The styles are closer to
Dio, Accept, UFO, Helloween, and Priest, but no Maiden.
So the songs are derivative: Big deal, so is 95% of all metal.
Difference is, good metal rocks (such as AoB), and crap doesn't
(such as everything after Somewhere in Time).
If I ever start spending so much effort putting metal music under the
microscope instead of enjoying it, please shoot me.
And no, there wasn't much thought put into this. Sorry.
Steve
Rick Cavalla
Steve/Joanne Kotsopoulos:
>On Sat, 25 Apr 1998 19:52:46 -0400, "Rick Cavalla"
><ra...@NO.erols.SPAM.com> wrote:
>
>>ƒå†és Hånð wrote in message
<6hrkbu$38h$1...@newsd-143.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
>>>YOUR A FUCKIN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
>>Thanks for putting the same time and thought into your response as I put
>>into my original post. Love the grammer, BTW.
>>
>>Rick Cavalla
>
>So, your post was about how much "thought" you put into it?
Actually, to a degree, yes. I don't like posts that basically say, "This
sucks". Anyone is capable of saying that and it adds nothing to the
dialectic. Whereas a post that goes into more depth, explaining why the
person likes/dislikes album X or band Y, can add more texture to the
discussion.
>I thought metal was a visceral thing; it either gives you goosebumps or it
>doesn't. It's not brain surgery.
Then this newsgroup, and the entire alt.rock-n-roll-metal.* hierarchy,
serves little purpose if metal, and all art for that matter, is simply to be
engaged at the gut level. That stance largely precludes the need for
discussion of the music. Perhaps we could filter the newsgroups down to
posts of "My Favorite Albums", "Tour Dates", and "New Releases".
>BTW, as for Bruce trying to write "Harris stuff", the album has
>nothing that sounds remotely like Maiden.
Well, then maybe Bruce shouldn't have been damn near shouting from the
mountaintops, "Accident of Birth is gonna be traditional, Iron Maiden
sounding heavy metal. Adrian and I are even gonna play old Maiden tunes in
concert." I largely hate 80's metal with a few rare instances (Maiden being
the most prominent), so Bruce sounds like he was taking part in some
deceptive advertising. Either that, or he thinks AoB DOES sound like
Maiden, in which case he's not deceitful but merely clueless.
>The styles are closer to
>Dio, Accept, UFO, Helloween, and Priest, but no Maiden.
Agreed.
>So the songs are derivative: Big deal, so is 95% of all metal.
Agreed again. However, many of those derivative bands are really into their
music. Sure, maybe band Y sounds just like band Z, but if band Y are
talented musicians and truly enjoy what they are doing, I really can't
complain. Unfortunately, I don't get that impression with AoB. It sounds
to me like Bruce wanted to do another Powerslave (for marketing reasons),
but the hired help weren't able to write the songs to pull it off. Instead
we got Dio/Accept/UFO/Helloween/Priest influenced metal by a guy (Roy Z.)
who probably isn't all that into that style. AoB sounds insincere to these
ears.
>Difference is, good metal rocks (such as AoB), and crap doesn't
>(such as everything after Somewhere in Time).
Well, I like to think that good metal does more than merely rock.
>If I ever start spending so much effort putting metal music under the
>microscope instead of enjoying it, please shoot me.
Well, I find that I enjoy it more when I put it under the microscope.
Thoughtful analysis of the music and the emotions behind it tends to help me
focus in on not only what I like/dislike, but also WHY I like/dislike it.
With each album I buy, and subsequent analysis, I am able to further chisel
away at the multi-faceted gem that is my definition of "great metal".
In the past, I used to have to hear an album before I knew if I'd like
it or not. I'd get burned more often than not by a band with a good single
and a lousy album, or an album that was good on the first few listens but
swiftly grew tiresome. Nowadays, I mostly buy albums that I haven't heard a
single note off of, yet I'm disappointed far less often. The main reason
behind that is because I put the music "under the microscope"; the analysis
has led me to a far better understanding of what I like.
>And no, there wasn't much thought put into this. Sorry.
Well, actually, there was some thought put into it. You've explained how
your definition of good metal is that it "rocks". I've stated how that is
far too vague a definition for me to comfortably work with.
Rick Cavalla
ra...@NO.erols.SPAM.com
(remove NO and SPAM to e-mail)
==============
Currently listening to: Septic Flesh - Ophidian Wheel
Trooper665
you say that the lyrics are mostly satanic. I tend to disagree. Bruce is
getting older, and with that, he's beginning to reflect on his life and the
approach of death and other things such as believing in god. He's gotten a bit
more sullen and depressing, but I still think his lyrics are truly emotional.
Trooper665
(conjuring the ghost of cain, he won't let you fall again)
Rick Cavalla
Trooper665 wrote:
>you say that the lyrics are mostly satanic. I tend to disagree. Bruce is
>getting older, and with that, he's beginning to reflect on his life and the
>approach of death and other things such as believing in god. He's gotten a
bit
>more sullen and depressing, but I still think his lyrics are truly
emotional.
I agree with you. While I may not be fond of Bruce's new musical direction,
his lyrics are still very cool. =)
Sarah Philp
> >BTW, as for Bruce trying to write "Harris stuff", the album has
> >nothing that sounds remotely like Maiden.
>
> Well, then maybe Bruce shouldn't have been damn near shouting from the
> mountaintops, "Accident of Birth is gonna be traditional, Iron Maiden
> sounding heavy metal. Adrian and I are even gonna play old Maiden tunes in
> concert." I largely hate 80's metal with a few rare instances (Maiden being
> the most prominent), so Bruce sounds like he was taking part in some
> deceptive advertising. Either that, or he thinks AoB DOES sound like
> Maiden, in which case he's not deceitful but merely clueless.
>
A few little points.
Bruce and H were 2/5 of 'the Iron Maiden sound' for quite some time. They
helped to create that sound and are therefore equally entitled to use it
if they want to.
And as for playing old Maiden tunes in concert - they wrote them, so why
shouldn't they. Frankly, most fans would have gone nuts if they had dared
not to play a few oldies. Presumably when the new album comes out, the
number of Maiden songs will be reduced, cos they will have something else
to play.
Personally, I feel that AoB was a bit of a disappointment after
Skunkworks and Balls, both of which are fantastic records. But, I don't
agree that it is merely a Maiden sound-alike done for the money. It's
just an album of traditional style heavy metal, with a couple of 90s
twists here and there. I wonder if people would think it sounded like
Maiden so much if it wasn't Bruce and Adrian...
- Skunk
Steve/Joanne Kotsopoulos
>>So the songs are derivative: Big deal, so is 95% of all metal.
>
>Agreed again. However, many of those derivative bands are really into their
>music. Sure, maybe band Y sounds just like band Z, but if band Y are
>talented musicians and truly enjoy what they are doing, I really can't
>complain. Unfortunately, I don't get that impression with AoB. It sounds
>to me like Bruce wanted to do another Powerslave (for marketing reasons),
>but the hired help weren't able to write the songs to pull it off. Instead
>we got Dio/Accept/UFO/Helloween/Priest influenced metal by a guy (Roy Z.)
>who probably isn't all that into that style. AoB sounds insincere to these
>ears.
>
I thought Roy did a great job on this album, and I like his style much
more than Adrian Smith's. I've always found Adrian to be a decent
songwriter (not great) but an average, at best, guitarist. AoB
confirmed this for me since he wrote the worst song on the album,
"Welcome to the Pit". It may not be fair, but but what gives me
goosebumps is Michael Schenker's killer tone, and so I tend to set his
style as my standard: incredibly fluid, clear, melodic, soulful, yet
very powerful. I find Smith sounds like he struggles to get his runs
out.
>>Difference is, good metal rocks (such as AoB), and crap doesn't
>>(such as everything after Somewhere in Time).
>
>
>Well, I like to think that good metal does more than merely rock.
>
If we're talking about prog rock, art rock, etc, sorry: To me it ain't
metal. It can be great music, but it's no metal.
>>If I ever start spending so much effort putting metal music under the
>>microscope instead of enjoying it, please shoot me.
>
>Well, I find that I enjoy it more when I put it under the microscope.
>Thoughtful analysis of the music and the emotions behind it tends to help me
>focus in on not only what I like/dislike, but also WHY I like/dislike it.
>With each album I buy, and subsequent analysis, I am able to further chisel
>away at the multi-faceted gem that is my definition of "great metal".
> In the past, I used to have to hear an album before I knew if I'd like
>it or not. I'd get burned more often than not by a band with a good single
>and a lousy album, or an album that was good on the first few listens but
>swiftly grew tiresome. Nowadays, I mostly buy albums that I haven't heard a
>single note off of, yet I'm disappointed far less often. The main reason
>behind that is because I put the music "under the microscope"; the analysis
>has led me to a far better understanding of what I like.
OK
>
>>And no, there wasn't much thought put into this. Sorry.
>
>
>Well, actually, there was some thought put into it. You've explained how
>your definition of good metal is that it "rocks". I've stated how that is
>far too vague a definition for me to comfortably work with.
It may sound simplistic, but that's because it is; Metal is the most
basic of music forms, and, IMO, to try and legitimize or rationalize
it as a medium by looking for more than it has to offer, I think we're
setting ourselves up for a letdown. I didn't imply there's something
wrong with not liking a particular album; my personal take on
something that "sucks" is, 'I got hosed!! Let's move on'.
Steve
>
>Rick Cavalla
>ra...@NO.erols.SPAM.com
>(remove NO and SPAM to e-mail)
>==============
>Currently listening to: Septic Flesh - Ophidian Wheel
Cyco
>>
>I thought Roy did a great job on this album, and I like his style much
>more than Adrian Smith's. I've always found Adrian to be a decent
>songwriter (not great) but an average, at best, guitarist. AoB
>confirmed this for me since he wrote the worst song on the album,
>"Welcome to the Pit".
Well, WTP is just a Psycho Motel material and it wasn't written for Bruce,
so it _seem_ to be worst track since it doesn't fit the whole AoB
stylistics. Adrian (right now) is damn good at crunchy riffs and thoughtfull
and soulfull solos but he need someone else to complete the song with
lyrics, vocal melodies and some adjustments. It wasn't enough time for that
on AoB sessions. And I won't call him "average", not the fastest maybe, and
I can compare him to Tony Iommi.
>It may not be fair, but but what gives me
>goosebumps is Michael Schenker's killer tone, and so I tend to set his
>style as my standard: incredibly fluid, clear, melodic, soulful, yet
>very powerful. I find Smith sounds like he struggles to get his runs
>out.
Have you listened to Psycho Motel records? Adrian comes with guts-blowing
riffs and aggressive solos and does it easily.But this music has nothing
common with maiden or UFO for example, it's just different and it's another
side of his talent. I think, it's just a matter of taste and habit.
Personally I could never stand Dave's live sound but a lot of people outta
here love it.
Rick Cavalla
Steve/Joanne Kotsopoulos wrote:
>It may sound simplistic, but that's because it is; Metal is the most
>basic of music forms,
Whoa. I think I found our major difference in opinion. I don't consider
metal to be the most basic of musical forms. In fact, I listen to metal
because I find it has depth and complexity far beyond alternative, punk,
classic rock, rap, etc. I find it to be the only form of "popular" music
that both has heaps of energy and passion combined with excellent
musicianship.
My main complaint with AoB is that it's simplistic. It's also my reason
for being not too fond of '80s metal. However, I think metal has really
grown up in the '90s. I hear classical and jazz influences in the most
extreme forms of metal that really, IMHO, take the music to amazing heights.
Not that I don't have the guilty pleasure of enjoying the occasional 80's
tune to remind me of simpler times. =)
I think we simply have very different tastes in heavy metal. If we drew
a Venn diagram, there'd probably only be a tiny little sliver overlapping,
labeled Iron Maiden. Although, what a great band to have a common affinity
for!
Rick Cavalla
ra...@NO.erols.SPAM.com
(remove NO and SPAM to e-mail)
==============
Currently listening to: Septic Flesh - Ophidian Wheel
Steve/Joanne Kotsopoulos
>Have you listened to Psycho Motel records? Adrian comes with guts-blowing
>riffs and aggressive solos and does it easily.But this music has nothing
>common with maiden or UFO for example, it's just different and it's another
>side of his talent. I think, it's just a matter of taste and habit.
>Personally I could never stand Dave's live sound but a lot of people outta
>here love it.
>
>
Actually, I like Dave's live sound; as for Adrian, his work with
Maiden (as a soloist) never impressed (I'm allowed to say that; I play
guitar and drums, so I know a mediocre guitarist when I hear him).
But I'll take your word for it about his playing in Psycho Motel,
since I haven't heard any of their stuff.
I wonder what Bruce's new album will sound like...
Steve
Peter R. Cook
Rick Cavalla wrote:
>
> Steve/Joanne Kotsopoulos wrote:
> >It may sound simplistic, but that's because it is; Metal is the most
> >basic of music forms,
>
> Whoa. I think I found our major difference in opinion. I don't
> consider metal to be the most basic of musical forms. In fact, I
> listen to metal because I find it has depth and complexity far beyond > alternative, punk, classic rock, rap, etc. I find it to be the only
> form of "popular" music that both has heaps of energy and passion
> combined with excellent musicianship.
It's time for me to step in here. I agree with you here.
> My main complaint with AoB is that it's simplistic.
I totally disagree with you here. AoB is brilliant. It's
what many metal fans have been waiting for for a LONG time.
REAL metal. Not Tool pansy ass pussy metal, not Anthrax
sell-out shit, not Metallica sell-out pussy crap, not
NIN noise, not White Zombie metal-disco. It's kick ass
intellegent music with power power chords that rip your
guys out. Taking the Queen is one of the best songs I've
heard in ages. It's fucking brilliant. That's the only way
I can put it into words. The weakest song on it is the one
Bruce wrote himself, take that anyway you want.
> It's also my reason for being not too fond of '80s metal. However, I > think metal has really grown up in the '90s.
Metal has not existed inthe 90's as far as I'm concerned.
About the only good lps has been Iron Maiden, S.O.D. Live
At Budokan, and very few others. Specify!
> I hear classical and jazz influences in the most extreme forms of
> metal that really, IMHO, take the music to amazing heights. Not
> that I don't have the guilty pleasure of enjoying the occasional 80's > tune to remind me of simpler times. =)
Who in the hell are you talking about?
> I think we simply have very different tastes in heavy metal. If we
> drew a Venn diagram, there'd probably only be a tiny little sliver
> overlapping, labeled Iron Maiden. Although, what a great band to have > a common affinity for!
Iron Maiden IS metal. Black Sabbath was their father.
--
+
Peter R. Cook. cook...@ma.ultranet.com
http://www.ultranet.com/~cookster
"Well, I've been to Massachusetts." Ronald Reagan responding
to the question "Have you ever been to a communist country".
-
james kubek
"Woe to you, Oh Earth and Sea, for the Devil sends the beast with wrath,
because he knows the time is short....
Let him who hath understanding reckon the number of the beast for it is
a human number, its number is Six hundred and sixty six." /|\
NY PBass
Me wrote:
> It was<BR>
>rehashed, 80's metal (which I happen to like, but this is the 90's and
>were<BR>
>almost at the end of this decade too!)
This is the problem with music in America today. "Oh, the decade is changing
and we have to move on to the 'next big thing'" Meanwhile in Europe, they stick
with what they know, and are treated to continuous great music and live
performances. So what if it sounds like 80s metal? Is there a law that says you
HAVE to adapt to whatever MT -fucking- V tells us is new and wonderful? Saxon's
album sounds just like 80s metal also, and it KICKS ASS. So does Savatage, and
so does Priest. So what? It's funny, around here in NY, more and more 80s
tribute bands are popping up, and doing quite well in the clubs. There's a
Priest tribute, a Maiden tribute & a Motley tribute. Maybe that says something
about changing to fit the trends.
^WhiplasH
> > It was<BR>
> >rehashed, 80's metal (which I happen to like, but this is the 90's and
> >almost at the end of this decade too!)
>
>
> and we have to move on to the 'next big thing'" Meanwhile in Europe, they stick
> with what they know, and are treated to continuous great music and live
> performances. So what if it sounds like 80s metal? Is there a law that says you
> HAVE to adapt to whatever MT -fucking- V tells us is new and wonderful? Saxon's
> album sounds just like 80s metal also, and it KICKS ASS. So does Savatage, and
> so does Priest. So what? It's funny, around here in NY, more and more 80s
> tribute bands are popping up, and doing quite well in the clubs. There's a
> Priest tribute, a Maiden tribute & a Motley tribute. Maybe that says something
> about changing to fit the trends.
>
..
P.S. FUCK METALLICA and their next "big thing," step off, cuz SlayeR
takes the stage!
__ __
__ /I/ /II| ______ ____
/I/ /G/ /G G| _ __ /IIGOR/ /IGOR\
/G/ /O/ /O/|O| |I| /I/ /G/ /G/ /R/
/O/ /R/ /R/_|R| |G|/G/ /O/__ /O/_/R/
/R/_ /I/ /IGOR|I| |O O/ /ROGI/ /RIGOR<
/IGOR/ /G/ /G/ |G| |RR/ /I/ /O/ \I\
/I/ /O/_____ |S| |I/ /G/____ /G/ |G|
/G/ /RIGORIGS/ /G/ /ORIGOR/ /I/ |S|
/O/ /S/
/R/
Sir Galahad
Total agreement on this one...the Mighty Tight Vag is a main reason why
american music sucks...every time you blink they change trends...And the
radio stations don't help either..i myself have reverted to not even
listening to the radio anymore.
It really sucks that bands that put out good music are being passed over
for the shit that is played now...really sad because from what i've seen,
Virtual XI is going to go the way of Ex Pink FLoyder Roger Waters' album
"Amused to Death": Critics called it the best thing since dark side of the
moon, total hype, and bombed because we were too busy listening to
soundgarden and Green Jello...thank you MTV...thank you so fucking much!
Sir Galahad - "Oh you didn't know?"
http://www.primenet.com/~srgalhad
^WhiplasH <kr...@grfn.org> wrote in article
<Pine.GSO.3.95.98050...@freenet.grfn.org>...
> > > It was<BR>
> > >rehashed, 80's metal (which I happen to like, but this is the 90's and
> > >were<BR>
> > >almost at the end of this decade too!)
> >
> >
Peter R. Cook
Sir Galahad wrote:
>
> Total agreement on this one...the Mighty Tight Vag is a main reason why
> american music sucks...every time you blink they change trends...And the
> radio stations don't help either..i myself have reverted to not even
> listening to the radio anymore.
>
> It really sucks that bands that put out good music are being passed over
> for the shit that is played now...really sad because from what i've seen,
> Virtual XI is going to go the way of Ex Pink FLoyder Roger Waters' album
> "Amused to Death": Critics called it the best thing since dark side of the
> moon, total hype, and bombed because we were too busy listening to
> soundgarden and Green Jello...thank you MTV...thank you so fucking much!
>
Well said, from someone in the U.S. who also doesn't listen to FM
radio anymore, gave up on playing and recording original heavy metal.
Mtv doesn't even play music videos anymore. When
they do it's almost entirely rap.
The music scene totally sucks in America. Hopefully in the
next decade it will turn around but I have a feeling it's
just going to get worse.
Eddie K.H.Tao
Sarah Philp <sa...@skunkworks.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
> Personally, I feel that AoB was a bit of a disappointment after
> Skunkworks and Balls, both of which are fantastic records. But, I don't
> agree that it is merely a Maiden sound-alike done for the money. It's
> just an album of traditional style heavy metal, with a couple of 90s
> twists here and there. I wonder if people would think it sounded like
> Maiden so much if it wasn't Bruce and Adrian...
I'm not sure whether I was looking for a replacement of Maiden or that
Maiden changed their musical direction or that my preferences have
changed. To me AoB rocks. The atmosphere of the songs is something I
like nowadays. I don't feel AoB sounds like Maiden, it's much more
heavy, much darker.
(I do regret Maiden doesn't have a singer with similar capabilities as
Bruce.)
btw: did you notice the AoB recording is slightly distorted?
Bye, Eddie