Originally Posted by Div
well considering almost any metal band out there lists maiden as their influence i would argue otherwise. and incase you unfortunately missed it, maiden went on a world tour this year to places metallica has never even been. theyve also been going strong for alot longer than metallica has and all their fans still love them, as opposed to metallica who, in most metalheads eyes, has been sucking it up for the last 20 years. also, their last album before DM was released in 2003, thats a pretty long hiatus for a band whos supposed to be "the most successful", while maiden has been releasing albums at a pretty consistent rate. so i wouldnt say it's safe to call them more successful than maiden at all.
I was speaking dollars for dollars. But yes, Maiden has put out many more noteworthy and respectable albums. No argument there. Many of those bands that sight Maiden as an influence, you know that Metallica are right along in there too. Both Maiden and Metallica - Metallica more so - changed the genre of Rock. Outside of them, Sabbath and Nirvana, I can't think of any other bands that have done that. Even with the piece-of-shit albums they have put out, they have still garnered more fans than Maiden. Yes Maiden may have toured this year to places that Metallica has never been (can that be proven?) and maybe they might have more 'loyal' fans but that hardly makes them more successful. Maiden's fans have dropped off as well since Powerslave. That's apparent through album and ticket sales since then. So with that said, is Metallica more successful? A resounding YES.