What are you listening to?

No that many to be honest!

But that's just me, thrash isn't the same when it has good production and is all modern and stuff. Usually i prefer the first 2 or 3 albums of all thrash bands then leave it at that because rarely do they go on keep producing great material.
 
Feel_The_Force said:
No that many to be honest!

But that's just me, thrash isn't the same when it has good production and is all modern and stuff. Usually i prefer the first 2 or 3 albums of all thrash bands then leave it at that because rarely do they go on keep producing great material.

It really must be you then cause depending on the overall vibe of a disc, a raw or slick production can be equally appealing to me.
 
AMOLAD is the 1st Iron Maiden cd I’ve bought in 14 years (OK, I’m old) and I think it’s a great album. Almost all the reviews I’ve read have been really enthusiastic, 4 or 5 stars out of 5, 9 out of 10 and so on.

I was a HUGE Maiden-fan back in the 80’s (OK, I’m really old) but completely lost interested in them after pretty horrible No Prayer… album. There were a couple of decent songs on the two previous Bruce re-union albums (BNW & DOD) but otherwise they were just plain average.

So I never believed they could produce an album like AMOLAD again. There are no filler songs and it’s progressive and heavy, actually one of the songs (Brighter than a Thousand Suns) is one of the heaviest if not THE heaviest song they’ve ever done IMHO. Also the other epics like The Longest Day, For the Greater Good of Good and The Legacy are nothing short of brilliant.
 
LavagesOfTime said:
you should rather ask: "is it boring and weak as the critics say it is?"... at least the reviews I read are not that enthusiastic.

Which critics did you read? The one I read was from Classic Rock Magazine and these guys are not usually nice. But they spoke very highly of the new album...or maybe the critics say the contrary of what it is as is often the case.