The Iron Maiden Thread v. The Merge of Souls

[Logain Ablar]

I actually love the sound of BNW though, I may think it's IM"s best sounding album to my ears.

Definitely the best sounding reunion era album for me.

Obviously, TWM has a highly repetitive chorus.  I think I preferred GotN.

Love those two songs. The repetition is a common complaint, but there’s far worse culprits.

I always think of The Talisman from TFF as a companion song to GotN. It’s another Janick one with a seafaring theme.

[The Walrus]

Had some Maiden come up on shuffle yesterday. It didn't hit me so much back then, but whenever a Book of Souls song pops up, I skip it. The muddiness, the thickness of the guitars really ruins the sound of the music to me. It's worse than ADTOE. And it sucks because I really, really like a lot of the songs on that album. Speed of Light is a belter.

But then Paschendale came on and I was all better.

[Dream Team]

Had some Maiden come up on shuffle yesterday. It didn't hit me so much back then, but whenever a Book of Souls song pops up, I skip it. The muddiness, the thickness of the guitars really ruins the sound of the music to me. It's worse than ADTOE. And it sucks because I really, really like a lot of the songs on that album. Speed of Light is a belter.

But then Paschendale came on and I was all better.

Yes, indefensible production choices by Harris. Apparently that guy just doesn't listen to smarter people when it comes to that stuff.

[MirrorMask]

"Not listening to smart people" has been his modus operandi in running the band since day one.

For all the '80s at the very least, he was right in doing so.

[Anguyen92]

His approach in editing in En Vivo isn't really much better.  Why do we need split screens and have the camera angles switching in quick motion while on those split screens.  It's like slow yourselves down on that front, man.

[Ruba]

I guess I'm in the minority for not particularly liking post-reunion Iron Maiden. They do still have some amazing songs, but way too much filler. Many of the longer songs feel like they have a lot of padding and short rockers tend to fall short of their 80s material. My favourite is probably Dance of Death for it's the most consistent of the bunch. And even then I have different favourites than most. Instead of the title track and Paschendale (both are good but have some issues) my picks would be No More Lies, Face in the Sand and Age of Innocence.

Journeyman.  Top five, maybe top three, Maiden song ever.

I honestly hadn't heard it in years but I'm listening to it now and it's a lot better than I remembered. Although Nicko's speeding the tempo up a fair bit.

[TAC]

I guess I'm in the minority for not particularly liking post-reunion Iron Maiden. They do still have some amazing songs, but way too much filler.

There's plenty of filler in the Classic Era with albums half as long.

[Ruba]

I guess I'm in the minority for not particularly liking post-reunion Iron Maiden. They do still have some amazing songs, but way too much filler.

There's plenty of filler in the Classic Era with albums half as long.

No, I'd say there was maybe one filler track per album.

s/t - no real filler, Sanctuary is a bit iffy but wasn't part of the original track listing
Killers - I've never liked Drifter
TNOTB - Gangland
Piece of Mind - Quest for Fire, Sun and Steel
Powerslave - no filler, even though it's the one that often gets singled out as half killer/half filler-album
SiT - Sea of Madness
SSoaSS - Can I Play With Madness is a single, but it's probably the worst song from the 'golden' era

[TAC]

I love Drifter...






…..and Gangland.

[Ruba]

That's cool. None of the songs I've listed I think are bad by any means and it would be just boring if everyone liked all the same songs.

Out of curiosity, which of the 80s albums you think have most filler?

[TAC]

Honestly, I find Powerslave the most average of the bunch, even though it has aged pretty well. On the other hand, time has not been as kind to Somewhere In Time.

Just my opinion.

[wolfking]

Now's as good of a time as any to ask this:

I'm a huge fan of Maiden and am well-versed in the catalog up through Fear of the Dark.

I've heard snippets of a couple songs on the two Bayley albums and have no real interest.

I know virtually nothing about the five "reunion" albums and would be interested in opinions about the best and worst of those albums, including, to the extent applicable, any resemblance between any of those albums and songs on them and the band's earlier albums/songs.

I'm amazed to even read this honestly. If you have missed out on the Reunion Era, you've missed out on an amazing 20 stretch of the band. They have release 5 great to excellent albums, along with 4 fantastic live albums.

I'm an older fan, but I would say that this 5 album run might be better than the Classic Era run of NOTB thru SSOASS.

You'll get everyone hooting and hollering their favorite, but I would honestly start and go chronologically.

Yeah, but...

With this new album, I'm not so sure which I prefer now.  Probably still classic though, but it's tough.

Come on, that was 4 years ago.  Fair call, my Perer Griffin gif may have been over the top but yeah thinking now it would be somewhat close.  If the reunion albums had Birch production that may even get the nod.  But, the golden era albums are fucking classic.

[Nick]

s/t - no real filler, Sanctuary is a bit iffy but wasn't part of the original track listing
Killers - I've never liked Drifter
TNOTB - Gangland
Piece of Mind - Quest for Fire, Sun and Steel
Powerslave - no filler, even though it's the one that often gets singled out as half killer/half filler-album
SiT - Sea of Madness
SSoaSS - Can I Play With Madness is a single, but it's probably the worst song from the 'golden' era

For starters the first two albums generally aren't considered part of the classic era for Maiden, as much as I love those albums.

Next up, how the hell is Sea of Madness a filler track? That's a great tune and it doesn't sound phoned in at all. Nothing from SiT would really be filler, but if I had to choose one it would be Heaven Can Wait.

Really the only filler from the classic era I'd say are Invaders, Gangland, Quest For Fire, Sun and Steel, and Can I Play With Madness?

[jammindude]

Calling Sea of Madness “filler” without even mentioning Deja Vu. Does not compute.

[Zydar]

Calling Sea of Madness “filler” without even mentioning Deja Vu. Does not compute.

Yeah. Sea of Madness is a top song for me, not only on that album but their entire career.

I'd say the filler on SiT is Long Distance Runner

[The Walrus]

All of you are correct, all three of those are filler! 

[Polarbear]

Calling Sea of Madness “filler” without even mentioning Deja Vu. Does not compute.

Yeah. Sea of Madness is a top song for me, not only on that album but their entire career.

I'd say the filler on SiT is Long Distance Runner

Sea of Madness is a friggin' tour de force! As is Long Distance Runner. Overall I'd rank SiT as my second favorite classic era album after Seventh Son.

Regarding the Reunion albums, I'd rank them on par with the classic era albums.

[bosk1]

What we view as "filler" and why is obviously a bit subjective.  I found this definition to be close to how I view it:

Album Filler are songs that take a perfunctory, Strictly Formula stance on creation in order to have something distinct to fill in some time. They're usually straightforward, unimaginative, and otherwise forgettable. Of course, it isn't set in stone that a song will suck for being filler.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AlbumFiller

That's not exactly right, at least how I view it.  But it's close.  I guess, to make it a bit closer to how I view it, it's something like this:

A song is "filler" when, after all is said and done, the band mostly has no aspirations of the song being a "hit" or a "favorite" or a "requested" song.  It may never get played live at all, other than maybe when touring in support of the album it appears on, or where the band is intentionally going for rare, deep cuts.  It's one that was written, wasn't bad enough to "cut," and left on the album because it's decent and fleshes out the album length. 

That's about how I see it.  So that said, the songs I consider "filler" on some of the early "classic" Maiden albums would be:

NOTB:
-The Prisoner
-Gangland
[I think Invaders almost feels like filler. But it's hard to classify an album opener as true "filler" because a band and anyone else working on an album will generally feel that the album opener was distinctly chosen as a strong opening song]

POM:
-Quest for Fire
-Sun and Steel
Maybe Still Life

Powerslave:
-Flash of the Blade
-The Duellists
-Back in the Village
I was also tempted to list Losfer Words (Big 'Orra), but I'm not sure what the general thought is on that song.  I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they thought it was a cool, novel thing to do an instrumental and that they were happy with it.  But I don't like it, AND it feels to me like just something extra to fill space, so I personally would lump it into the "filler" category.  But, again, I'm giving them a bit of the benefit of the doubt and just chalking it up to a grand idea that fell flat in the execution rather than something that is more blatantly filler.

SiT:
-The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner
-Déjà-Vu
Note:  I like both of these songs a lot.  But they still fit my subjective definition of filler.

[I'm not ranking Seventh Son, even though I recognize that most would consider it part of the "classic" period.  I just don't like the album and cannot tell you how more than a couple of songs even go.  SELF-EDIT:  OK, after looking at the track list, I actually know 4 of the 8 songs.  But still, I can't really comment on the other half of the album.]

It's also interesting to note that, for bands that came out of the '70s, '80s, and even up through the mid-'90s, I think there's a noticeable pattern that "filler" songs will generally come in the back half of where "side 1" would be on a cassette or vinyl version of the album, and the middle of side 2.  There was a general consensus that that is where you would "hide" the weaker songs to pad out the album.  You would usually see a pattern something like this for an 8-10 song album:
-Strong opener, but a song that is perhaps not quite "quality" enough to be a single
-1 or 2 singles
-1 or 2 "filler" songs to round out side 1
-Strong song to lead off side 2 and give people incentive to flip the record/tape over
-Maybe another single
-2-3 filler songs
-Strong closer

[MirrorMask]

Wanna know two songs which are filler, because the bands in question admitted they wrote them just to fill an otherwise too much short album?

Black Sabbath's Paranoid and Judas Priest's You've Got Another Thing Coming.

Yeah, those two smash hits.

In this day and age, where the rule of 2 sides of 22-23 minutes is something of the past, it doesn't have sense anymore to call any song "filler" as intended. This is already a more acceptable defition, as said by Bosk:

A song is "filler" when, after all is said and done, the band mostly has no aspirations of the song being a "hit" or a "favorite" or a "requested" song.  It may never get played live at all, other than maybe when touring in support of the album it appears on, or where the band is intentionally going for rare, deep cuts.  It's one that was written, wasn't bad enough to "cut," and left on the album because it's decent and fleshes out the album length. 

[Stadler]

There's very little filler in this catalogue (through the original run):

S/T:  Transylvania
Killers: None
NOTB:   Gangland (Keep in mind, "Total Eclipse", the rumored replacement for Gangland, is perhaps my favorite Maiden song ever.  Certainly top three.)
Piece Of Mind:  Sun And Steel; Quest For Fire
Powerslave: Eh.   I go both ways on Flash Of The Blade
Somewhere In Time:  The Loneliness Of The Long Distance Runner
Seventh Son:  None

I'm not going to list No Prayer or Fear; I think those are a tier down from that which came before, and I can either list most of them as "filler", but that's not really accurate, since the albums ARE consistent.  It's not as if there are one or two KILLER songs and the rest blows.  For me, the big issue on those two albums is Bruce adopting that more "AC/DC" voice as opposed to the more "operatic, air-raid siren" voice.   

[bosk1]

I go both ways

Seventh Son:  None

Interesting.  Is that because it's a concept album?  I was thinking to myself when deciding whether to comment on that one that, in a way, it's hard to classify songs on a concept album as "filler" because each song on a concept album generally has a role that is integral to the concept.  But by the same token, a song can have a specific role that is integral to the whole, and STILL kinda be "filler" because it still really fits my definition above.  It moves the ball in terms of the concept.  But it doesn't move the ball in terms of song quality.  I dunno, I just found that to be an interesting concept, at least in my own mind.

[Ruba]

I apparently opened some kind of can of worms here. I thought it was needless to say that IMHO applies very strongly to what I said.

"Filler" is not really correct terminology on my part, I doubt Iron Maiden has ever put any songs on their albums just to increase the running time. It's just more convinient to write than "songs I feel are of below average in quality of the band is capable of" or something .

NOTB:   Gangland (Keep in mind, "Total Eclipse", the rumored replacement for Gangland, is perhaps my favorite Maiden song ever.  Certainly top three.)

Yes, I've read that they put Gangland on the album because Total Eclipse had already been a B-side to Run to the Hills-single. Thankfully it's included on the remastered TNOTB, such a great track.

[bosk1]

I apparently opened some kind of can of worms here. I thought it was needless to say that IMHO applies very strongly to what I said.

Eh, I wouldn't look at it that way.  I think it's just that people have strong opinions about what songs they like and don't like, and "filler" implies "bad song" to many.  And with a band with as many songs as Maiden has, opinions are so varied that somebody is going to cry foul for just about any choice.

That said, my maybe-controversial opinion is:  The Final Frontier is BY FAR Maiden's strongest, most consistent album, and is the only one that doesn't have even a single filler track.  EVERY song is of the highest quality and contributes to the only true "Masterpiece" in their discography.

So there.

[The Walrus]

That might be the hottest take in this thread, bosk. 

[bosk1]

Okay, I will add a "*" to my last sentence:  *NOTB and POM, while not as consistent, are about as close to being "masterpieces" and you can get.  True "classics" in every sense.

...but I can't just leave it there without a bit more controversy, so:  **and SiT is close behind.  Powerslave is not.

So there. 

[Stadler]

Killers needs to be in this conversation.  I think there are better albums - Powerslave - but top to botton, I don't know if there is as CONSISTENT and solid a record as Killers in their catalogue.   IMHO. 

[The Walrus]

Well you just go take your shopping cart full of unopened Final Frontier discs and leave it out in the lot with the other heathens. 

I'm kinda with Stadler. I love Killers, and never really think about its consistency, but damn if it isn't one of their best.

[Ruba]

Well you just go take your shopping cart full of unopened Final Frontier discs and leave it out in the lot with the other heathens. 

Someday bosk will rig all the stray carts at your local supermarket with speakers that play El Dorado 24/7.

[bosk1]

OH, HECK YEAH! 

[MirrorMask]

The Final Frontier however has the same kind of songs of its predecessor. You can ditch Satellite 15 and rearrange the tracklist to compare it with A Matter of Life and Death, and you get the exact kind of songs:

Different World / Final Frontier: energetic opener
Colors / Eldorado: the more ordinary fast song, single-.ish material
Brighter / Mercy: somber song about war (ok, this is generic)
Pilgrim / Alchemist: fast upbeat song
Longest Day / Avalion: first epic with a long buildup
Out of the Shadows / Coming home: ballad
Benny Breeg / Man who would be king: epic song with Murray's input
Greater Good / Wind blows: longest epic, Harris solo composition
Lord of Light / Starblind: oddball epic, a bit left field of what they usually do
Legacy / Talisman: epic with acoustic intro

I mean, of course the two albums are very different, but if you look at the general style and approach, the only thing that couldn't already be found on the previous album in TFF is the intro. I'm sure it could be argued that Maiden have ALWAYS had the same approach and that the '80s album are filled with 8 songs where the slower is track #2, but no album in the reunion era has this strong match with its predecessor.

[pg1067]

I guess I'm in the minority for not particularly liking post-reunion Iron Maiden. They do still have some amazing songs, but way too much filler.

There's plenty of filler in the Classic Era with albums half as long.

No, I'd say there was maybe one filler track per album.

s/t - no real filler, Sanctuary is a bit iffy but wasn't part of the original track listing
Killers - I've never liked Drifter
TNOTB - Gangland
Piece of Mind - Quest for Fire, Sun and Steel
Powerslave - no filler, even though it's the one that often gets singled out as half killer/half filler-album
SiT - Sea of Madness
SSoaSS - Can I Play With Madness is a single, but it's probably the worst song from the 'golden' era

If we're defining "filler" to mean sub-standard songs (which isn't really how it should be defined), I'd say the following:

Iron Maiden:  Strange World
Killers:  Another Life (I'm not a huge fan of the shuffle beat of Drifter, but it's pretty good anyway)
TNOTB:  Nothing (and, for me, Gangland >> Total Eclipse)
POM:  Nothing (I LOVE Sun and Steel -- one of my favorite Dave Murray solos -- and I have never understood the hate for QOF)
Powerslave:  Back in the Village
SIT:  Heaven Can Wait (but really just for the whoa-whoa section)
SSOASS:  Virtually everything other than Moonchild and the title track (of course, this is relative to the albums that came before)

On the other hand, if we're defining "filler" in a more traditional manner, that really starts with NPFTD, and I can't think of a single song that I would truly call "filler" on the first seven albums.

[bosk1]

The Final Frontier however has the same kind of songs of its predecessor. You can ditch Satellite 15 and rearrange the tracklist to compare it with A Matter of Life and Death, and you get the exact kind of songs:

Different World / Final Frontier: energetic opener
Colors / Eldorado: the more ordinary fast song, single-.ish material
Brighter / Mercy: somber song about war (ok, this is generic)
Pilgrim / Alchemist: fast upbeat song
Longest Day / Avalion: first epic with a long buildup
Out of the Shadows / Coming home: ballad
Benny Breeg / Man who would be king: epic song with Murray's input
Greater Good / Wind blows: longest epic, Harris solo composition
Lord of Light / Starblind: oddball epic, a bit left field of what they usually do
Legacy / Talisman: epic with acoustic intro

I mean, of course the two albums are very different, but if you look at the general style and approach, the only thing that couldn't already be found on the previous album in TFF is the intro. I'm sure it could be argued that Maiden have ALWAYS had the same approach and that the '80s album are filled with 8 songs where the slower is track #2, but no album in the reunion era has this strong match with its predecessor.

Okay.  But aside from the question of "why would you want to cut Satellite 15 from The Final Frontier when it's PERFECT as-is?" and even if we take that track-by-track comparison as granted, as I go track-by-track, I consider almost every one of the TFF songs to be vastly superior to its AMOLAD "counterpart."  That isn't to say that most or all of those AMOLAD songs aren't good.  They are.  But to me, TFF is just much stronger, and much more consistently so.  Yeah, the pattern might not be anything new.  But the song quality is just unprecedented across the board, IMO.

[Nick]

Wanna know two songs which are filler, because the bands in question admitted they wrote them just to fill an otherwise too much short album?

Black Sabbath's Paranoid and Judas Priest's You've Got Another Thing Coming.

Yeah, those two smash hits.

In this day and age, where the rule of 2 sides of 22-23 minutes is something of the past, it doesn't have sense anymore to call any song "filler" as intended. This is already a more acceptable defition, as said by Bosk:

A song is "filler" when, after all is said and done, the band mostly has no aspirations of the song being a "hit" or a "favorite" or a "requested" song.  It may never get played live at all, other than maybe when touring in support of the album it appears on, or where the band is intentionally going for rare, deep cuts.  It's one that was written, wasn't bad enough to "cut," and left on the album because it's decent and fleshes out the album length. 

One of Rush's biggest hits at that time, New World Man, was a last minute quick throw together on the album. In addition one of Rush's universally most loved non-singles, Natural Science, was put together to round out the album after the rest of what they had been focused on was complete.

[cramx3]

So was Pour Some Sugar on Me.

But when you think about it, those songs are all fairly straight forward so just because they are filler doesn''t mean they aren't good or can't be hits.

[Cool Chris]

Listened to TFF for the first time in ages over the last couple days. At the time it was quite a drop from AMoLaD for me, with BoS being a solid rebound. I couldn't figure out why I didn't connect with it. This time around I liked it more than I remembered. I think the weak opener and last two tracks brings it down quite a bit. The middle songs I enjoyed a lot.