Controversial opinions on metal

FWIW I think that the Iron Maiden fans that insist that Iron Maiden was more influenced by 70's progressive rock than Judas Priest are silly, but if the "modeling" is so significant as to disqualify them as "musically positive", you probably don't consider very much "musically positive" traditional metal to exist.
 
At least we can all agree that Maiden is vastly inferior to Priest.

vice versa imo.

also, i think Maidens first two album are amongst their best.

Cryptic Writings is my favorite after Rust in Peace. Much higher quality control than Countdown to Extinction, and more diverse than Youthanasia.

Id say its my second favorite from the post Rust In Peace albums, right behind Youthanasia

and wtf is going on in that pic? LMAO!
 
RIP is obviously the best Megadeth album. I would also accept Peace Sells though even though I find it inferior as the influence was greater on the scene than RIP.

Youthanasia is a much better record than Cryptic Writings. There are some gems on CW, but overall it falls short of the triumvirate (RIP/CTE/Y). The System Has Failed is miles ahead of Youthanasia though.
 
Rust in Peace has lots of nifty displays of musicianship but nothing on it touches quality like Loved to Deth or The Conjuring. And the title track is total ass.
 
Iron Maiden didn't reach the apex of anything musically positive, since the albums that most people favor by them are basically modeled after Judas Priest anyway.

Besides, the musicians and vocalist in Judas Priest are very obviously better than those in Iron Maiden.

This is stupid. Every band is "modeled" to other bands to some degree. Obviously Priest influenced Maiden, but it's not like Maiden are pure Priest worship. There are punk and prog influences that make them quite unique. Oh, and Priest has (or at least had) a heavy blues influence that is absent in Maiden.
 
I don't really get the blues influence thing. I mean, yeah, it's inevitable that it would exist in their earlier stuff, but Stained Class and much of what came beyond is sheer metal. Even on Sad Wings of Destiny I don't see how it is worth mentioning. Maybe I just don't know wtf blues rock is. Same goes for Iron Maiden. The punk in Iron Maiden was wholly gone when Di'Anno left, and even there you're talking about a few songs on the S/T and that's basically it. Why can't both simply be considered the totally metal-defining bands they are?
 
By the time that Stained Class rolled around, the blues influence in Priest's music was negligible. The similarities between Bruce Dickinson era Maiden and Judas Priest circa that album are not even remotely coincidental, even though all of Iron Maiden's music places a much higher emphasis on catchy vocal melodies than early Judas Priest, which is probably also why most casual metal fans find them more accessible.

Judas Priest was definitely a better band in terms of originality, songwriting, musicianship and vocals even though Iron Maiden's golden era was far more radio-friendly and instantly accessible, even on albums like Seventh Son of a Seventh Son which are supposedly departures from the norm and considered very progressive by Iron Maiden's standards. Despite that, it isn't groundbreaking like Sad Wings of Destiny or Stained Class and neither were any of their other albums even though their early music showed a lot of potential to go in a very unique direction that was quickly abandoned in place of a much more commercial and already established path.

They didn't push any new boundaries, at all, and despite Bruce's showboating wildman image, his vocals were actually very tame by metal standards compared to his counterpart in Priest, much like the rest of the band compared to early Judas Priest. I don't see how blindly sticking to already established metal norms five or more years late qualifies you for reaching the apex of heavy metal or any other type of music. I think their main accomplishment was giving metal more commercial exposure than it previously had, which is due to the qualities of their music that I have already explained.

I do have to say that Paul Di'Anno was the most unique asset that the band had. I don't blame them for removing him based on his behavior hindering their success and musical direction, but I don't remember hearing any other metal singers similar to him. There were other singers like Bruce Dickinson, however, before and after his rise to stardom.

In summary, a band that chooses to stay within an already established archetype several years after it has become standard is not boundary-pushing and doesn't reach the apex of anything unless your expectations are very small.
 
RIP is obviously the best Megadeth album. I would also accept Peace Sells though even though I find it inferior as the influence was greater on the scene than RIP.

Youthanasia is a much better record than Cryptic Writings. There are some gems on CW, but overall it falls short of the triumvirate (RIP/CTE/Y). The System Has Failed is miles ahead of Youthanasia though.

Agreed. Cryptic Writings is a good album but Youthanasia is a lot better. And RIP is their best album imo.
 
At least we can all agree that Maiden is vastly inferior to Priest.

Judas Priest demolishes Iron Maiden. It's not even close. Iron Maiden is a joke in comparison.

Judas Priest's best albums are a lot
more adventurous (and less pretentious) than anything by Iron Maiden despite being years older. There's no comparison.

Rob Halford also shits all over Bruce Dickinson in vocal range and technique even though Dickinson tries way harder to show off his vocals than Halford.

I'm no afficionado when it comes to either band, but I will cosign on the general sentiment here and side with Judas Priest.

You people are all out of your minds :guh:
 
Some people will say I'm nuts but I've always been a Maiden fan. Never got into Judas Priest, the vocals kill it for me. Respect the band immensely, they've been the first band to proudly wave the flag of Heavy Metal and call themselves a Heavy Metal Band, but that's about it. I can't listen to their albums.

On the other hand, I've spent most of my teen years listening to the classic Iron Maiden albums and I still love each and all of them.

I guess it's a very personal thing, both bands are legendary and have amazing discographies.
 
Vegard Pompey said:
You people are all out of your minds :guh:

How? Saying that Judas Priest is more original and more compositionally sophisticated and that Rob Halford is a technically superior vocalist to Dickinson or Di'Anno would be a fairly objective statement, even if you choose to side with the more obviously commercial band.
 
Comparing the two bands is pointless and the only reason people are comparing Priest and Maiden is due to the fact that they are two of the biggest names in metal.
 
I have yet to find an Iron Maiden song I like and the only Judas Priest song I like is Burn in Hell off Jugulator.


I have a feeling that's a pretty controversial opinion.
 
How? Saying that Judas Priest is more original and more compositionally sophisticated and that Rob Halford is a technically superior vocalist to Dickinson or Di'Anno would be a fairly objective statement, even if you choose to side with the more obviously commercial band.

I've no arguments, I was just expressing disagreement. I'm not saying music can't be discussed, but none of your arguments mean a damn to me. Neither originality nor compositional sophistication necessarily correlate with quality (and even then, I think Maiden are more original than you give them credit for) and I don't go around counting the notes a vocalist can hit. As far as I'm concerned, Dickinson's vocals on Seventh Son in no way need improvement.
 
How? Saying that Judas Priest is more original and more compositionally sophisticated and that Rob Halford is a technically superior vocalist to Dickinson or Di'Anno would be a fairly objective statement, even if you choose to side with the more obviously commercial band.

What makes you say this?

Priest has written way more straight forward, made for radio pop songs than Maiden has. To my armature ears I would say that Maiden generally has more complex song structures and interplay between musicians. The exception would be SWoD-SC, which are fairly intricate albums. But I wouldn't describe anything from Killing Machine- Turbo as "complex".

And as far as Halford being better than Dickinson... well its a matter of taste. Halford has a bigger range, but Dickinson's voice is a lot more full bodied, which I think a lot of people like. Personally I think we're talking about two of the greatest metal singers ever, so its like debating Tolstoy vs. Dostoevsky- there's not really much of a point.
 
crimsonfloyd said:
What makes you say this?

Priest has written way more straight forward, made for radio pop songs than Maiden has. To my armature ears I would say that Maiden generally has more complex song structures and interplay between musicians. The exception would be SWoD-SC, which are fairly intricate albums. But I wouldn't describe anything from Killing Machine- Turbo as "complex".

And as far as Halford being better than Dickinson... well its a matter of taste. Halford has a bigger range, but Dickinson's voice is a lot more full bodied, which I think a lot of people like. Personally I think we're talking about two of the greatest metal singers ever, so its like debating Tolstoy vs. Dostoevsky- there's not really much of a point.

We're mostly discussing the first few Judas Priest albums (and mainly Stained Class in all actuality) in this conversation, even if you keep talking about other later albums for some reason. I have stated the album titles that I am talking about mumerous times even if you choose not to read before you reply. All of Iron Maiden's early music is more radio-friendly and less compositionaly advanced than early Judas Priest. It is also possible to objectify the level of vocal ability that someone has, in terms of range, power and versatility, all of which Halford possessed in far greater abundance than Dickinson during his prime while also using far more intricate and complex vocal patterns and harmonies and exercising greater reserve.
 
We're mostly discussing the first few Judas Priest albums (and mainly Stained Class in all actuality) in this conversation, even if you keep talking about other later albums for some reason. I have stated the album titles that I am talking about mumerous times even if you choose not to read before you reply. All of Iron Maiden's early music is more radio-friendly and less compositionaly advanced than early Judas Priest. It is also possible to objectify the level of vocal ability that someone has, in terms of range, power and versatility, all of which Halford possessed in far greater abundance than Dickinson during his prime while also using far more intricate and complex vocal patterns and harmonies and exercising greater reserve.

The thing is the bands developed in opposite directions. Priest got more simple over time, while Maiden got more complex over time. So if you want to say "early Priest is more complex than early Maiden" then I am going to reply "mid-era Maiden is more complex than mid-era Priest." Speaking generally (i.e. taking entire discographies into account), I would say Maiden tend to write more complex music.

I'm not really going argue that Halford isn't better at all those things, because when push comes to shove, I do think he's the best vocalist metal has ever seen. However, to act like Dickinson is some second-rate knockoff is complete and utter bullshit. He is an elite singer.
 
To be honest... and it kills me to say this... Judas Priest's song Painkiller, is better then every Maiden song put together... just my opinion.

But, i still have full respect for both bands and their members.