Saxon

Andy wrote:

BearOnUnicycle wrote:

Andy wrote:

BearOnUnicycle wrote:

I don't like them at all. Mediocre band IMO, but I find "Innocence is no Excuse" enjoyable sometimes.

"Mediocre" says the guy with a Megadeth avatar.

Pff it is Mustaine avatar. Not crazy about Megadeath.
Seriously, Saxon is nothing special even by 80's standards. Give me Raven or Angel Witch instead.

Not crazy about the band, just the sole founding member, primary songwriter, and lead guitar player. Got it.

Hey, he even misspelled the name!

krokus wrote:

In my opinion if you like traditional heavy metal you like SAXON (at least 10 albums by them) but if you dont than i understand you dont like the band and others from the NWOBHM.

Saxon never really penetrated my radar back in the 80s, none of my metal friends owned any of their albums. I don't think I even heard Saxon until sometime in the 90s. They are fun to occasionally jam on and they are great live. I have the 3-disc collection and that's plenty for my needs.

The only NWOBHM bands I still listen to with any regularity are Iron Maiden, Motorhead and Witchfinder General. I don't include Judas Priest with NWOBHM (they were earlier), but add them to that list if they belong there.

S.D. wrote:

krokus wrote:

In my opinion if you like traditional heavy metal you like SAXON (at least 10 albums by them) but if you dont than i understand you dont like the band and others from the NWOBHM.

Saxon never really penetrated my radar back in the 80s, none of my metal friends owned any of their albums. I don't think I even heard Saxon until sometime in the 90s. They are fun to occasionally jam on and they are great live. I have the 3-disc collection and that's plenty for my needs.

The only NWOBHM bands I still listen to with any regularity are Iron Maiden, Motorhead and Witchfinder General. I don't include Judas Priest with NWOBHM (they were earlier), but add them to that list if they belong there.

Motorhead is not NWOBHM. They pre-dated the scene by a couple of years, the same with Priest.

My first encounter with Saxon was with Wheels of Steel - a friend had a cassette dub of that album with an elaborately hand drawn cover. Ha!

I love this band. I discovered them back in 1980 when wheels of steel came out. I dig everything they have ever released and consider them one of my top ten favorite bands of all time. Since some have mentioned some of the more popular albums I will mention some that were overlooked.
"Dogs of War" is a fantastic album I recommend you get this. "Innocence is no excuse", "Solid ball of rock" and "destiny" are all albums I recommend.

Quote :

Motorhead is not NWOBHM. They pre-dated the scene by a couple of years, the same with Priest.

I read an interview once with Fast Eddie Clark and he said he considered motorhead and priest to both be nwobhm....of course he also said it wasn't about when it came out but he considered nwobhm a musical style that would always be releasing new albums long after he was gone.

[quote="Witchfinder"][quote="S.D."]

Motorhead is not NWOBHM. They pre-dated the scene by a couple of years.
quote]

Just because the term hadn't been penned yet when Motorhead released their first lp in 1977 doesn't mean they were not part of that scene.

ALOT of NWOBHM bands released albums in 1978 and 1979

Most of them were alrready together and gigging around England at the time Motorhead was released, so I have to disagree with your above statement.

Witchfinder wrote:

Motorhead is not NWOBHM. They pre-dated the scene by a couple of years

Just because the term hadn't been penned yet when Motorhead released their first lp in 1977 doesn't mean they were not part of that scene.

ALOT of NWOBHM bands released albums in 1978 and 1979

Most of them were alrready together and gigging around England at the time Motorhead was released, so I have to disagree with your above statement.

James B. wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Motorhead is not NWOBHM. They pre-dated the scene by a couple of years

Just because the term hadn't been penned yet when Motorhead released their first lp in 1977 doesn't mean they were not part of that scene.

ALOT of NWOBHM bands released albums in 1978 and 1979

Most of them were alrready together and gigging around England at the time Motorhead was released, so I have to disagree with your above statement.

Motorhead pre-dated the NWOBHM by years and Lemmy had been on the scene for almost a decade by the time the NWOBHM rolled around. The same with Priest. Both bands heavily influenced the NWOBHM and in turn found their own careers buoyed by the movement. I just think they pre-existed it. Of course, the concept of the NWOBHM is inexact as one did not even need to be a Brit to be considered part of the movement - ie, The EF Band. For me, Motorhead is not NWOBHM but Tank is - a band they clearly influenced.

"NWOBHM" is not a style of music, it's not a genre, it's a lazy Magazine writer's term so he didn't have to expend the energy to actually describe the music all these different bands played, he just made up a meaningless term that describes nothing other than a specific time period.

S.D. wrote:

"NWOBHM" is not a style of music, it's not a genre, it's a lazy Magazine writer's term so he didn't have to expend the energy to actually describe the music all these different bands played, he just made up a meaningless term that describes nothing other than a specific time period.

Also true. But if I can't argue about meaningless semantics, what am I going to post about?

Quote :

Dogs of War" is a fantastic album I recommend you get this.

I second this, love this album of heavy metal played by guys from Britain that were part of a wave of this kind of traditional metal.

Witchfinder wrote:

James B. wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Motorhead is not NWOBHM. They pre-dated the scene by a couple of years

Just because the term hadn't been penned yet when Motorhead released their first lp in 1977 doesn't mean they were not part of that scene.

ALOT of NWOBHM bands released albums in 1978 and 1979

Most of them were alrready together and gigging around England at the time Motorhead was released, so I have to disagree with your above statement.

Motorhead pre-dated the NWOBHM by years and Lemmy had been on the scene for almost a decade by the time the NWOBHM rolled around. The same with Priest. Both bands heavily influenced the NWOBHM and in turn found their own careers buoyed by the movement. I just think they pre-existed it. Of course, the concept of the NWOBHM is inexact as one did not even need to be a Brit to be considered part of the movement - ie, The EF Band. For me, Motorhead is not NWOBHM but Tank is - a band they clearly influenced.

Just because Lemmy was in Hawkwind has nothing to do with either of our opinions. Using your logic, Iron Maiden isn't a NWOBHM band either. Steve began that band in 1975. Saxon, the topic of this thread (REMEMBER) formed in 1976, one year after Motorhead.

James B. wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

James B. wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

Motorhead is not NWOBHM. They pre-dated the scene by a couple of years

Just because the term hadn't been penned yet when Motorhead released their first lp in 1977 doesn't mean they were not part of that scene.

ALOT of NWOBHM bands released albums in 1978 and 1979

Most of them were alrready together and gigging around England at the time Motorhead was released, so I have to disagree with your above statement.

Motorhead pre-dated the NWOBHM by years and Lemmy had been on the scene for almost a decade by the time the NWOBHM rolled around. The same with Priest. Both bands heavily influenced the NWOBHM and in turn found their own careers buoyed by the movement. I just think they pre-existed it. Of course, the concept of the NWOBHM is inexact as one did not even need to be a Brit to be considered part of the movement - ie, The EF Band. For me, Motorhead is not NWOBHM but Tank is - a band they clearly influenced.

Just because Lemmy was in Hawkwind has nothing to do with either of our opinions. Using your logic, Iron Maiden isn't a NWOBHM band either. Steve began that band in 1975. Saxon, the topic of this thread (REMEMBER) formed in 1976, one year after Motorhead.

Maiden had released nothing in 1976 and wouldn't release anything for years. Lemmy was a known musician in an actual band that released albums long before that. Saxon released nothing in 1976 and wouldn't release anything for years. My point about Lemmy (and also Priest) was that they were established musicians with actual releases on record labels years before the start of the NWOBHM. They weren't unknown bands with a demo that they self released in 1978. That's my point. I think of the NWOBHM as a movement that sprang to the fore with multitudes of bands all over England in 78-79 period - most of which cranked out DIY releases, some of which led to signing to major labels. Motorhead and Priest were far beyond that stage at that time. However, both bands were also at the vanguard of Heavy Metal at the same time. That's why I don't consider either Priest or Motorhead to be NWOBHM bands.

Witchfinder wrote:

Maiden had released nothing in 1976 and wouldn't release anything for years. Lemmy was a known musician in an actual band that released albums long before that. Saxon released nothing in 1976 and wouldn't release anything for years. My point about Lemmy (and also Priest) was that they were established musicians with actual releases on record labels years before the start of the NWOBHM. They weren't unknown bands with a demo that they self released in 1978. That's my point. I think of the NWOBHM as a movement that sprang to the fore with multitudes of bands all over England in 78-79 period - most of which cranked out DIY releases, some of which led to signing to major labels. Motorhead and Priest were far beyond that stage at that time. However, both bands were also at the vanguard of Heavy Metal at the same time. That's why I don't consider either Priest or Motorhead to be NWOBHM bands.

Don't know how Priest got into the conversation ? I understood your point the first time about the time frame of Motorhead releasing that first lp. What I am actually trying to convey is that bands don't have to release "product" to be included in something or considered part of it. For example, I was in a band called Graceful Lu. We played thrash and shared stages with Death Angel, Shellshock (pre death angel), Laaz Rocket, and Vio-lence. We never released anything and according to you, were not part of a scene. I was in a band for 5 years before them and they played music more akin to UFO and Humble Pie. I feel that has nothing to do with anything, only included it to use your assessment of how it applied to Lemmy before Motorhead, Motorhead, and what you believe regarding them. Also, why can't a band of the same genre or marketing term influence another band musically in a short period of time. Example, what you said about Tank and Motorhead. Metallica influenced alot of thrash bands in the early/mid 80's. So according to you, they can't be called a thrash band cause they influenced other thrash bands in just a couple of years.

Priest was mentioned earlier in the thread which is why I brought them up. I think you miss my point which is simply that I think Motorhead pre-dated the NWOBHM. I never heard them referred to as a NWOBHM band and have never thought of them as such. My mentioning Tank was supposed to be illustrative of the fact that Motorhead pre-dated the movement, that's all. I don't know what your trying to say about Metallica and thrash. I never said anything of the sort.

Witchfinder wrote:

I don't know what your trying to say about Metallica and thrash. I never said anything of the sort.

I was just applyig your particular regarding influence to another aspect. You said Motorhead influenced Tank, so they couldn't be of the same scene or movement.

NWOBHM is just a media term to me. You can call Motorhead whatever you like. My only purpose for debate is to illustrate that alot of bands considered by fans or media outlets to be New Wave Of British Heavy Metal or whatever you wanna call them were playing the same clubs around England at the same time as Motorhead. Which to me makes them part of the same scene. Which is my point. Not that Motorhead is a NWOBHM or not.

Again I can point to Metallica. I saw them in and around L.A quite a bit before they went up north to the Bay Area. Them like Slayer were part of the musical scene of So. Calif at the time. They were not playig anything like most of the other bands, still doesn't change the fact that they were part of something. Of course, we all know that years later everyone looks back in hindsight and calls everything by some other term just to make it easier to file it someplace.

Sorry for dragging this out, I was merely trying to understand your position and apply it to other similar things. My opinion means no more or no less than yours, sometimes it's fun to debate.

James B. wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

I don't know what your trying to say about Metallica and thrash. I never said anything of the sort.

I was just applyig your particular regarding influence to another aspect. You said Motorhead influenced Tank, so they couldn't be of the same scene or movement.

NWOBHM is just a media term to me. You can call Motorhead whatever you like. My only purpose for debate is to illustrate that alot of bands considered by fans or media outlets to be New Wave Of British Heavy Metal or whatever you wanna call them were playing the same clubs around England at the same time as Motorhead. Which to me makes them part of the same scene. Which is my point. Not that Motorhead is a NWOBHM or not.

Again I can point to Metallica. I saw them in and around L.A quite a bit before they went up north to the Bay Area. Them like Slayer were part of the musical scene of So. Calif at the time. They were not playig anything like most of the other bands, still doesn't change the fact that they were part of something. Of course, we all know that years later everyone looks back in hindsight and calls everything by some other term just to make it easier to file it someplace.

Sorry for dragging this out, I was merely trying to understand your position and apply it to other similar things. My opinion means no more or no less than yours, sometimes it's fun to debate.

No worries! It's always fun to argue about this kind of thing.

It will surprise absolutely no one that Saxon is one of my favourite metal bands. Albums like Strong Arm of the Law defined their sound, and whilst somewhat simplistic by today's standards, were full of sing along moments that made them classic metal anthems. I've always enjoyed the mix of classic and 'trying for radio play' sounds on the album Crusader, and most of Innocence is No Excuse. Anything from there until around 2000 I'm not keen on (maybe you'd call it mediocre). However, albums since then have fused a European power metal sound to their bar-room origins, creating a consistent set of albums such as Lionheart and Call to Arms. Sure, there are some bad tracks and fillers on some albums, and they're not the greatest band ever, but to claim they are mediocre baffles me.

This song is a good example of latter-era Saxon:

Saxon just rules. While I enjoy the classic early 80s albums (Wheels of Steel until Power & The Glory), for me, the albums from 1995's Dogs Of War till 2010's Call To Arms are their best ones, especially 1997's Unleash The Beast, 1999's Metalhead and 2004's Lionheart. But every album past 1995 is very good to excellent to these ears. As for the "lighter" era (1985-1989), I used to dislike it, but while replaying them, each album has some solid heavy tracks, among lighter and more "commercial" stuff. I find amazing that guys who have been doing this for so long still have the energy and creativity to release good albums.

I'll say it again, Saxon is the best of the "old" bands in term of writing new albums that can live up (and even surpass) their classic stuff. And they always deliver when they hit the stage.

labrekk wrote:

Saxon just rules. While I enjoy the classic early 80s albums (Wheels of Steel until Power & The Glory), for me, the albums from 1995's Dogs Of War till 2010's Call To Arms are their best ones, especially 1997's Unleash The Beast, 1999's Metalhead and 2004's Lionheart. But every album past 1995 is very good to excellent to these ears. As for the "lighter" era (1985-1989), I used to dislike it, but while replaying them, each album has some solid heavy tracks, among lighter and more "commercial" stuff. I find amazing that guys who have been doing this for so long still have the energy and creativity to release good albums.

I'll say it again, Saxon is the best of the "old" bands in term of writing new albums that can live up (and even surpass) their classic stuff. And they always deliver when they hit the stage.

Amen!

labrekk wrote:

Saxon just rules. While I enjoy the classic early 80s albums (Wheels of Steel until Power & The Glory), for me, the albums from 1995's Dogs Of War till 2010's Call To Arms are their best ones, especially 1997's Unleash The Beast, 1999's Metalhead and 2004's Lionheart. But every album past 1995 is very good to excellent to these ears. As for the "lighter" era (1985-1989), I used to dislike it, but while replaying them, each album has some solid heavy tracks, among lighter and more "commercial" stuff. I find amazing that guys who have been doing this for so long still have the energy and creativity to release good albums.

I'll say it again, Saxon is the best of the "old" bands in term of writing new albums that can live up (and even surpass) their classic stuff. And they always deliver when they hit the stage.

Totally agree.

I was into Saxon back in the early days with Strong Arm of the Law, Denim & Leather, etc but I started to lose interest with Crusader - thought it was a weak album (but great title track).

Following Crusader with an obvious change of direction - shooting for US radio airplay I guess (?) with Innocence Is No Excuse, Rock The Nations, and Destiny, all pretty weak albums, I gave up on them.

Luckily I happened to hear Dogs of War in '95 - wow! Probably my fave Saxon album....followed by the equally strong Unleash The Beast..then Metalhead...all great stuff if you dig old school heavy metal/hard rock.

So I was back as a fan and like labrekk I think their period from the '90's on to the current day as their best. I've grown to appreciate Saxon more and more lately btw (they just released some recent live sets that I've been getting into!).

Witchfinder wrote:

The Power & The Glory is my favorite Saxon album. I also like Crusader but after that, it's pretty much a crapfest until the 90s.

He's a Witch! Burn Him!!!

UNCLE SAXON'S KICKASS CDS wrote:

Witchfinder wrote:

The Power & The Glory is my favorite Saxon album. I also like Crusader but after that, it's pretty much a crapfest until the 90s.

He's a Witch! Burn Him!!!

If you think Innocence Is Excuse, Rock The Nations and Destiny are worth listening to, I think you may be deaf.

Or maybe it is you?
Destiny and Innocence are among the best albums they did.