Metal Reviews

You're welcome to comment on:


Click here to see the review.

Wow, I almost feel like I could have written this review (check out the live shows thread). I saw them in Dallas the first night. I agree that the shortness of DT's set and the lack of old Maiden songs was kind of a downer, but it was still a great show. Good review.

Yeah, I was a little bummed by the Maiden setlist, but I guess it was to be expected on the heels of the Somewhere Back In Time tour. They still killed it, even if the material itself isn't 100% what I would have wanted.

That said, yeah, they really need to not sequence 2-3 songs in a row that go slow-acoustic/chug/slow-acoustic. It was extremely samey.

LOVE Maiden, but it doesn't surprise me that they pulled this crap again, after the Matter of Life and Death tour debacle - playing the whole damn album practically and boring everyone to death.

They take the "we're not a vaudeville act" thing too far. Play your old stuff and sprinkle in 3 to 5 new songs - if you must! Sheesh.

That's a bit unfair.

They've been playing those songs for 30 years. It's not really their fault if you missed all of the 500 previous tours where they played Aces High.

Yeah, that's kinda how I felt. Sure, I would have loved to hear some older stuff, but they've been playing that stuff for decades. Good thing is, I love their newer stuff. The Wicker Man was awe inspiring live.

I didn't miss those tours - I saw them. I just happen to LIKE that stuff. All I'm saying is, there is a tried and true formula for playing live that I appreciate - roughly, 85% old stuff, 15% new stuff. I'm not saying they can't VARY the old stuff - play "Sea of Madness" and "Only the Good Die Young", for example, instead of "Heaven Can Wait" and "The Clairvoyant". But I don't really understand the complaining about the staples - Aces High, 2 Minutes, Run to the Hills - no matter how many times you've seen Maiden, aren't you still wanting to see those songs live? I certainly am.

Any band that doesn't play all or most of a new album live is just admitting they're washed up old men that shouldn't be making music anymore. God forbid a band have pride in their new material and think it's as good as anything they've done lol

Yeah, noods is kinda right.

When you're doing 85% old material you might as well stop recording because you're telling people not to care about your latest album.

Looking the setlist, for me the problem is the song order... sparcing some hits/old songs between the newer ones can make it run better.

Playing all or most of a new album, when we're talking about a band with a 30 plus career and a countless genre-defining "classics", makes for a very disappointing and boring show in my opinion.

Also, I don't think it's a matter of pride - it's a matter of prime. I'd prefer the formula that leverages the classic stalwart songs from a band's most prolific, creative period. Versus having most of the show force their new music down our throats as a way to justify that they still have it. They can show they have it with a small showcase of new songs, and if their career keeps going, those "new" songs that are worthy can be added as regulars to the live mix of offerings in the same time-tested manner as the established classics.

And this isn't a new idea of course. Most bands do this anyway. It's just that Maiden, recently (with the obvious exception of the 666 Tour) has been on a mission to heavily showcase new stuff.

I think Maiden has done a great job in offering old with new material recently. Since 2005 they've offered up 3 different 'best of/classics' tours. I saw them on one in 2005 which had all classics in the set list, they then toured on 'The Early Years' w/ Ozzfest and just recently did 'The Back In Time tour. What more do Maiden fans want? I've been fairly critical of them over the last decade but now looking back over the last ten years, Maiden have given their fans everything they could ask for.

I say good for Maiden to go out and showcase their last decade of material on this tour. For that matter thank you Iron Maiden for touring at all this summer when you clearly don't need to. This constant debate over what Maiden plays in set lists has gone beyond ridiculous. Get over it and just enjoy one of the greatest metal bands to ever grace the planet. Now go get you fkin' shinebox.

Easy there chief. I don't "want" anything more. Just responding to the notion that bands should play most or all of their new album on a tour, otherwise they're admitting they're washed up. And giving my opinion that I do not prefer that scenario, nor agree.

A band acknowledging they're passed their prime is basically the same thing as what I was saying

I agree w/ noodles

Don't think of it as "acknowledging" they're past their prime. Think of it as being tuned into the reality that material from their creative prime is likely more worthy of being well represented in a live show, versus a live show that completely dismisses that prime material - as you are suggesting should be the case.

I fail to see the difference.

Then there's the flip side of the coin, Judas Priest. Yeah they will bust out Breaking the Law and Living After Midnight but their gonna blast through it and make sure you see the boredom on their faces while playing it. I don't blame Maiden one bit I'm sure they are sick to fucking death of Run to the Hills, hell I know I am. I don't really ever want to hear that song ever again in my entire life. It's like Enter Sandman, Back in Black or Paranoid at this point, how many times can you hear that same damn song in your life? Now imagine being expected to play that same damn song over and over again every night for years. Besides, if you don't like the new stuff that Maiden puts pout you aren't really a true fan anyways, just one of the legions of uncreative dullards stuck living in 20 years ago. I've come to find that fans are the people who stifle creativity for the groups. Nobody wants anything new, different, or adventurous, all words I would use to describe Maiden's post reunion work. You want the same old shit your comfortable with and I'm more than pleased that Maiden is willing to give that type of "fan" the middle finger.

Then why are bands doing the whole album anniversary thing where they play through entire album's each night? I saw Judas Priest during the British Steel tour and they didn't seem bored. They fucking rocked it. So unless this is just a cash grab which it may very well be (and I would be wrong) then a lot of bands do like a return to their classic stuff, e.g., 'deth, Metallica, Slayer, Judas Priest, and who else?.

I mildly agree with you on fans as being stifling yet only in some cases. Stifling could also be a positive thing. Somebody should've stifled Anthrax's macho streak post-Belladonna, for example.

What I was saying in the review is that there is no reason why there isn't enough time to satisfy both. You could easily play half of a set of new songs and half a set of old songs. Everybody's happy.

And get over the "you aren't a true fan unless you like all of their albums" bullshit. I don't really like most of the new Iron Maiden material because it isn't as good. A Matter of Life and Death is the only one of their new albums I actually give any time of day to and the rest of it sounds the same to me, and played live, it all sounded the same. That would be EXACTLY like saying that you aren't a true Metallica fan unless you love and appreciate all of the albums after And Justice For All. See, stupid huh?