I think skyrefuge, tenebre, and Hestis hit the nail on the head. There are plenty of folks who believe that Maiden continues to release exceptional music, and oftentimes, songs don't become classics without repeated plays. I think the majority of people who don't care for the newer stuff really didn't bother to listen to it in the first place. Most bands are going to have that one album or that era of releases that can't be topped, but that doesn't mean that their newer material is not worth the time of day. I like Maiden's stance on presenting new songs to their audience. Even though I was disappointed with "A Matter Of Life And Death," I thought the songs came off rather well live, and I give the guys nothing but respect for having the balls to play the whole album. My beef with Maiden lies in their selection of older material for the stage. If they're going to play a set of mostly new material, do they really need to bombard us with the same five old songs at the end of the set? Furthermore, do they really need to include those same five songs in their "nostalgic" sets as well? I know you can't please everybody, but I think there are better ways to work with setlists. I think Iron Maiden needs to learn a lesson in setlist preparation from their latest opening act.
Stay metal. Never rust.
Albert
