PDA

View Full Version : Iron Maiden finishes recording new album


IrritatedTrout
02-15-2010, 08:11 PM
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=135181

I've known this for a week or two but this might be news to y'all. Very excited.:light:

idrinkwine732
02-15-2010, 08:27 PM
My wallet is prepared.

ADD
02-15-2010, 08:46 PM
Funny I listened to Maiden this morning for the first time in months too, great news :fist: Here's hoping they announce those U.S dates soon too.

Maiden33
02-15-2010, 09:10 PM
Wait, this is ridiculous. They only started recording like a month ago. This can't be good.

es156
02-15-2010, 09:15 PM
Wait, this is ridiculous. They only started recording like a month ago. This can't be good.

The eternal optimist.

:lol:

idrinkwine732
02-15-2010, 09:16 PM
Funny I listened to Maiden this morning for the first time in months too, great news :fist: Here's hoping they announce those U.S dates soon too.

FIRST TIME IN MONTHS???? I can't go more than a day or two...

Wait, this is ridiculous. They only started recording like a month ago. This can't be good.

I was thinking that too, but I trust in them.

Div
02-15-2010, 09:18 PM
weird... soon as i clicked on that link Number of the Beast started playing in my playlist :eyes:


anyway... lets get an album title and some tracklistings.

Maiden33
02-15-2010, 09:21 PM
The eternal optimist.

:lol:

Well I think I have some reason to be concerned. Probably my biggest issue with the last record was that I thought it sounded rushed. Mostly in that the performances (mainly Bruce's) sounded mediocre. I had thought (and hoped) they would take some time with this one, especially since it's the last, to ensure it's gonna be a great one and up to their fullest potential. This really killed some of my expectations. I'm kind of expecting more half-assed work now, sad to say. I mean - Maiden is still Maiden, I'm sure I'll love it, but I still care about it.

JRA
02-15-2010, 09:44 PM
I see this going both ways. On the one hand they put themselves on a tight schedule and just hammered out metal without time to make it boring, or they just went through the "oh this was so easy to make" because they didn't put any effort into it.

Butcher of Birth
02-16-2010, 03:56 AM
I just saw Nicko Sunday too at his Grand Opening. I figured him being there was only for a short break from recording then heading back.

Later I find out he is in town for a few more weeks and then heading back to meet up with Maiden. I figured "Wow, few weeks? This is gonna be a sick album", but now it looks like the next few weeks will be the mix down and if needed the members can head back to the studio.

Figuring their schedule now, in a month or a half I suspect they will rehearse the next tour.

But Yeah, Jeff and I share the same concerns. Wasn't it not to long ago they had planned to Release the album later this year?

ravenheart
02-16-2010, 05:30 AM
Nicko seemed to think they wouldn't release it until 2011. If they've already finished the recording phase, what the fuck are they planning to do with it for that long?

And yeah, they've finished it far too fast.

ravenheart
02-16-2010, 05:31 AM
FIRST TIME IN MONTHS???? I can't go more than a day or two...

I haven't listened to a Maiden studio album in a very, very long time.

Last things I listened to were Rock In Rio and Live At Donington, and they were both months ago.

TonyD
02-16-2010, 06:11 AM
If they spent a lot of time writing and rehearsing, spending less than a month in the studio is nothing to worry about.

The_jman
02-16-2010, 07:21 AM
Wait, this is ridiculous. They only started recording like a month ago. This can't be good.
thought maiden only gave themselves like 2 weeks to write and record each time they go in?

Butcher of Birth
02-16-2010, 08:34 AM
I remember on New Year's Eve he said "In 2 days I'm meeting up with the boys and we're gonna record a new album for you all which should be out late this year."

Didn't they meet up in November sometime to work on some writing?

DethMaiden
02-16-2010, 08:43 AM
I would love to whine about this but if it means I can have a new Maiden album faster, I can't. Keep in mind that the first four records came out in consecutive years, and they fucking rule.

IrritatedTrout
02-16-2010, 08:51 AM
I remember on New Year's Eve he said "In 2 days I'm meeting up with the boys and we're gonna record a new album for you all which should be out late this year."

Didn't they meet up in November sometime to work on some writing?

Yes, they had writing sessions in Paris.

Maiden33
02-16-2010, 09:31 AM
thought maiden only gave themselves like 2 weeks to write and record each time they go in?

I don't know where you heard that, but even in the 80s Maiden took nearly a month to do most albums. And that's not including writing.

And Brad - yeah, in the 80s it took less time, but everybody did back then. The last few records all took several months to record. The fact that this one was done this fast downright scares me.

Sanitarium78
02-16-2010, 11:33 AM
What the hell is all the complaining for? You do realize that these guys are professional muscians and they've probably had all this new stuff written and rehearsed for quite sometime before they went into the studio, correct? They probably said it wouldn't be done until next year so they could get people to stop asking them about it. They could go and record the album in peace without fans and media bugging them about it the whole time.

Anything that gets Maiden back out on the road sooner is never a thing to bitch about.

Maiden33
02-16-2010, 11:40 AM
Anything that gets Maiden back out on the road sooner is never a thing to bitch about.

This is the exact attitude I hate.

Studio albums aren't something bands should rush and just shit out so they can go on tour.

Regarding the complaining - it's not complaining, it's concern. It's not necessarily a bad thing that they did this this fast, it's just a cause for concern being that I felt the last album sounded rushed, and they apparently did this one in half the time. I want them to put out the best album possible, especially since there's a valid chance this will be their last one.

rjturtle9
02-16-2010, 12:55 PM
I love how every Maiden thread gets turned into an argument where people complain about Maiden33's "bitching". He speaks the truth people, two weeks is too little of a time frame to record what might possibly the last Maiden record.

powerslave_85
02-16-2010, 12:58 PM
I agree with the sentiment that quick recording is less worrying than quick writing.

ChildrenofSodom
02-16-2010, 01:01 PM
The biggest question is: if they are done recording, why do we have to wait so long to get it? Mix that shit in a month, get the album art done in that time...you dont have to advertise TOO much because you are Iron Fucking Maiden. I say out by June.

Maiden33
02-16-2010, 04:23 PM
I love how every Maiden thread gets turned into an argument where people complain about Maiden33's "bitching". He speaks the truth people, two weeks is too little of a time frame to record what might possibly the last Maiden record.

Thanks, dude.

Regarding release: If they are done recording now, there is absolutely no reason why this can't be out by the end of the summer, if not sooner.

powerslave_85
02-16-2010, 04:24 PM
Mostly in that the performances (mainly Bruce's) sounded mediocre. Really? I thought the vocals were a huge improvement over Dance of Death.

The whole recording timeline vs. release date is rather interesting though. Somewhat related: I was reading the Wikipedia article on The Clash's London Calling album, and it says they finished recording it in November of '79 and released it the next month. And they released an album the year before that AND the year after (keep in mind that London Calling was a double album, and the one that came after was a triple album). That's absolutely unheard of now. I really don't know why that is, but I suspect that marketing and the record labels play a key role.

Maiden33
02-16-2010, 04:38 PM
Really? I thought the vocals were a huge improvement over Dance of Death.

The whole recording timeline vs. release date is rather interesting though. Somewhat related: I was reading the Wikipedia article on The Clash's London Calling album, and it says they finished recording it in November of '79 and released it the next month. And they released an album the year before that AND the year after (keep in mind that London Calling was a double album, and the one that came after was a triple album). That's absolutely unheard of now. I really don't know why that is, but I suspect that marketing and the record labels play a key role.

Well, two things:

1) I didn't say I thought the vocals on Dance of Death sounded all that great either. My big point is: listen to either album and then listen to Tyranny of Souls. Vocals are about 15x better.

2) Something to keep in mind about recording albums 30 years ago is the fact that technology was a fraction of as advanced as it is now. It's easy to not go overboard with all kinds of digital tricks and nuances when you can't. When bands were recording on analog back in the 70's, there wasn't a whole lot you could do to suck up time. It was just go in, get it done. Now you can spend an infinite amount of time tweaking things.

Also, I'm not sure the Clash are the best example. Not a knock on them at all, but not exactly a band who would/should take a long time to make an album. How much is there really to do? Their music isn't a) terribly complex, or b) feature a lot of instrumental overdubs, complex vocal harmonies, and other sorts of stuff that takes a long time to do in the studio.

DethMaiden
02-16-2010, 04:43 PM
Well, two things:

1) I didn't say I thought the vocals on Dance of Death sounded all that great either. My big point is: listen to either album and then listen to Tyranny of Souls. Vocals are about 15x better.

2) Something to keep in mind about recording albums 30 years ago is the fact that technology was a fraction of as advanced as it is now. It's easy to not go overboard with all kinds of digital tricks and nuances when you can't. When bands were recording on analog back in the 70's, there wasn't a whole lot you could do to suck up time. It was just go in, get it done. Now you can spend an infinite amount of time tweaking things.

Also, I'm not sure the Clash are the best example. Not a knock on them at all, but not exactly a band who would/should take a long time to make an album. How much is there really to do? Their music isn't a) terribly complex, or b) feature a lot of instrumental overdubs, complex vocal harmonies, and other sorts of stuff that takes a long time to do in the studio.

Methinks you haven't heard London Calling or Sandinista. Those are both way more complex than a Maiden album.

Maiden33
02-16-2010, 04:45 PM
Methinks you haven't heard London Calling or Sandinista. Those are both way more complex than a Maiden album.

I kinda doubt it, but I'm not talking about Maiden necessarily. Maiden can't even touch a lot of other bands I listen to in terms of instrumental performance and recording. Maiden would hear the amount of guitar tracks on a Dungeon record and shit themselves. That second point was more of a broad point, not specific to Maiden.

powerslave_85
02-16-2010, 04:45 PM
My big point is: listen to either album and then listen to Tyranny of Souls. Vocals are about 15x better.That's definitely true.



Also, I'm not sure the Clash are the best example. Not a knock on them at all, but not exactly a band who would/should take a long time to make an album. How much is there really to do? Their music isn't a) terribly complex, or b) feature a lot of instrumental overdubs, complex vocal harmonies, and other sorts of stuff that takes a long time to do in the studio.Not true. London Calling and their later albums featured a ton of different instruments, including strings, horns, pianos, and some electronic experimentation towards the end of their run. That, and London Calling had 19 tracks, and Sandinista! had 36 (all of which were average length, not 1-2 minutes).

Sanitarium78
02-16-2010, 05:53 PM
Just to add to the whole timeline of recording thing. Black Sabbath recorded their first album in 6 hours. In know it was 40 years ago and things were different then but it proves that it is possible to record a great album in a short period of time.

Another thing is some are acting like they know every move Maiden has been making in this whole recording process. They were probably recording for much longer than they actually reported they were doing. Thus, the reason some are thinking they've only been reording for two weeks. Maiden has been done touring for what, almost a year now? They've probably been in the studio a lot longer than the two weeks everyone is thinking.

Even if it did take only two weeks to record what's the big deal? Besides most of FOTD and some questionable material on NPFTD and Virtual XI has Maiden really ever given their fans a reason to doubt they don't know what they're doing?

Maiden33
02-16-2010, 06:01 PM
Just to add to the whole timeline of recording thing. Black Sabbath recorded their first album in 6 hours. In know it was 40 years ago and things were different then but it proves that it is possible to record a great album in a short period of time.

Another thing is some are acting like they know every move Maiden has been making in this whole recording process. They were probably recording for much longer than they actually reported they were doing. Thus, the reason some are thinking they've only been reording for two weeks. Maiden has been done touring for what, almost a year now? They've probably been in the studio a lot longer than the two weeks everyone is thinking.

Even if it did take only two weeks to record what's the big deal? Besides most of FOTD and some questionable material on NPFTD and Virtual XI has Maiden really ever given their fans a reason to doubt they don't know what they're doing?

I'm kind of getting tired of restating the same points over and over again. So, if you look back at everything I've said, you can more or less find rebuttals to most of what you said.

But in regards to what "we know", Maiden have always made their albums in a strictly linear process. After a huge given amount of time off, they group for a couple of weeks to write and rehearse, then go into the studio to record. They're not the kind of band who has people coming and going, recording an album piece by piece over the course of 6 months to a year. They've pretty much always been a band who believes in everyone being there, working together, hammering it out. It's just that all of the reunion albums have taken quite a good bit longer to do - so naturally there is a concern that they might not be taking time to ensure this is really gonna be the best record it can be.

Sanitarium78
02-16-2010, 06:16 PM
But in regards to what "we know", Maiden have always made their albums in a strictly linear process. After a huge given amount of time off, they group for a couple of weeks to write and rehearse, then go into the studio to record. They're not the kind of band who has people coming and going, recording an album piece by piece over the course of 6 months to a year. They've pretty much always been a band who believes in everyone being there, working together, hammering it out. It's just that all of the reunion albums have taken quite a good bit longer to do - so naturally there is a concern that they might not be taking time to ensure this is really gonna be the best record it can be.

I've just never paid attention to Maiden, or how any band for that matter, goes about their recording process. Honestly, how long a band takes isn't impotant at all to me as long as they come out with something good. Those who are conserned about the short recording shouldn't worry about it until we're able to hear the album. Then we can tell weather the fast recording hurt it or not.

Maiden33
02-16-2010, 06:26 PM
Honestly, how long a band takes isn't impotant at all to me as long as they come out with something good. Those who are conserned about the short recording shouldn't worry about it until we're able to hear the album. Then we can tell weather the fast recording hurt it or not.

Basically, I agree. It's just that it is important to me when it's all I know. Once the album comes out, if I don't think it suffers as a result or is indifferent, fine - no harm, no foul. I'm not going to hold a grudge or anything. But when the only thing I know about my favorite band's new album is that it was recorded in half of the time as their last, which I felt seemed rushed - I am going to be concerned. And that's basically the end of the argument for me.

powerslave_85
02-16-2010, 06:28 PM
Well, even if the release date gets dragged out, I hope they throw us a bone in the form of a tracklisting/album cover by this summer. Maybe even a "this is what each song is about" interview like they've done for the last couple albums. That's the kind of pre-release info that gets me all excited.

SomewhereInTime72
02-17-2010, 01:17 PM
I don't see why the recording being done fast is a bad thing at all. I don't think that Maiden's performance's are going to suffer as a result of anything like that. The only thing I would be worried about rushing is the writing process and the mixing/mastering process, which need a lot more time spent on them, IMO.

Anyhow, a new Maiden album soon, is great.

Travis The Dragon
04-09-2010, 04:27 PM
MAJOR update!!!

Iron Maiden today revealed that the new album will be a 3 disc set! However, they didn't actually go into the studio and record new material, but have instead taken songs from their entire discography and remixed them. Here is the official track listing:

Disc 1:
1. Relworp
2. Maiden of the Iron
3. Child Of The Wrath
4. The Rue Morgue Murders
5. Those Damn Children!
6. Thy Name Shall Be Hallowed
7. Fly Icarus Fly!
8. Super Trooper
9. Deuces Low
10. The Ancient Mariner Meets Mother Goose

Disc 2:
1. Years Of Drunkenness
2. Hell Can't Wait
3. Madness Is Playing With Me
4. 14th Father Of A 14th Father
5. Cigarette Of Faith
6. The Slaughter Has Your Daughter.
7. Run Or I Will Kill You
8. The Dark Is Scaring Me
9. Flying Around The Lord
10. The Edge Of Man

Disc 3:
1. The Future Is Real
2. Gambling With An Angel
3. Man Of Wicker
4. Brothers Who Slit Their Wrists
5. Those Dreams Are Making Me Go Wild!
6. Make Some Rain
7. The World Is Not The Same
8. So, Do These Colors Walk?

Bruce and Dave commented on the album.

Bruce: "What we basically did was just take the original songs and rearrange them, putting the middle parts at the beginning and so on. So they're going to be the same length, just in a different order. The only major remix will be The Angel And The Gambler. Also, after the album is done, we're going to do like Rush and tour without and opening act and perform all 3 discs of music. I'm really excited about this!"

Dave: "I'm so stoked about the new album and doing all of it on the tour! What I'm most excited about is playing the new 20 minute epic remix, Gambling With An Angel. In fact, that's one of the songs we're thinking of playing on the upcoming summer tour. I can't wait!"


Source: My silly mind.

IrritatedTrout
04-09-2010, 05:11 PM
You have too much time on your hands.

The_jman
04-09-2010, 05:29 PM
you had me going for about 25 seconds... some pretty creative song tiles though... I particularly liked, so do these colors walk?