Iron Maiden - The Book Of Souls

Maiden & Minions:

http://www.metalinsider.net/metal-on-metal/deviantartist-replaces-iron-maidens-eddie-with-minions

That is even cooler than when SpongeBob replaced Eddie for a bit.

I watch the Maiden Fan group on Deviantart (the place I'm usually on since I don't come here as much as I used to) so it will probably show up in my watching feed soon.

Iron Maiden - The Book Of Souls (BMG) 2015

DISC ONE
1. If Eternity Should Fail (8:28)
2. Speed Of Light (5:01)
3. The Great Unknown (6:37)
4. The Red And The Black (13:33)
5. When The River Runs Deep (5:52)
6. The Book Of Souls (10:27)

DISC TWO
1. Death Or Glory (5:13)
2. Shadows Of The Valley (7:32)
3. Tears Of A Clown (4:59)
4. The Man Of Sorrows (6:28)
5. Empire Of The Clouds (18:01)

"The Book of Souls" is the sixteenth full-length studio album by the UK heavy metal legend that is Iron Maiden. The album is the band's first in five years, and is the follow-up to The Final Frontier (2010). My worry with this album began when I saw the tracklisting and that a good portion of the songs were of epic length. The shortest song is at five minutes, while the longest pushes the twenty minute mark. The long songs have become a staple of the band since reforming with Bruce in 2000. Of course they had long songs in the past, such as the "Rime of the Ancient Mariner" and "Alexander the Great". However, those songs weren't favorites for most fans. Once the album was released the rabid fans immediately began proclaiming it to be the best album the band had released, well, since their last album. Haha! Reviews I have read state that it's "brilliant", "a masterpiece" and "a razor-sharp dose of vintage Maiden." Obviously when a band as beloved as Maiden releases a new album, expectations are high, but they also receive a ton of leeway, especially from the aforementioned fanatics. For me, as much as I love Maiden, I haven't grown to love their more recent albums like I did those classic 80's albums. I even grew to love the Blaze-era albums. However, albums like "Dance of Death" and "A Matter of Life & Death", no matter how much I try, never seem to grab me by the jugular and really draw me in. I just find myself wanting to like those album more than I do. So, with this new album I suspected that it might be more of the same. 90 plus minutes of music is hard to absorb, no matter who the artist is, but since this is a double album it’s easy to listen to disc one and disc two separately.

The "Book of Souls" is a laborious listen, but because Maiden is Maiden, I had a strong desire to want to like this album. I played it many times over so that I would begin to absorb it and enjoy it. There is much to like here, however, there is a lot of fat that could have been trimmed as well. The shortest song on the entire album is "Tears of a Clown," which clocks in at just under five minutes. As well, the single for the album "Speed of Light" clocks in at just over five minutes and is one of the more immediately like-able songs on the record. It is also one of the more upbeat songs. Songs pushing seven to ten minutes are more the norm with "Empire Of the Clouds" pushing towards the twenty minute mark. "The Red and the Black" is a classic Steve Harris epic that clocks in at 13:33. While I enjoyed the song there are a good four minutes of music that could have been shaven from the song by removing some unnecessary repetition. The song sports an absolutely epic solo that reminds me of "Seventh Son of a Seventh Son" but is unfortunately lost in the fat of the entire song. More "woooo-ooo-oooo's" are included on this song as well and seem to have become a trend with Maiden on recent releases.

The title track is probably one of my favorites on the album. The song is a is a Gers and Harris composition and starts off with a beautiful acoustic guitar intro, then builds from a mid-paced number to an up-beat number at about the six minute mark. The song is full of guitar harmonies and is driven by the guitars and galloping bass lines, as opposed to plodding along slowly and methodically. Bruce sounds a vital as he ever has, though he doesn't seem to push for those higher range vocals like he did in the 80's.

If that's not enough for you, there is a whole second disc of music that is a second full length album of it's own. Among some of the more memorable moments of disc two are the chorus for “Shadows of the Valley” and the proggy solo work at the tail-end of the song, as well as the aforementioned "Tears of a Clown". The song features a section in which the guitarist take turns ripping out some tasty licks. The final track is an 18-minute epic that recalls the story of the crash of the British airship R101. On October 5th, 1930 while flying over France on its maiden voyage the airship crashed killing 48 of the 54 people on board. At the time the ship was the jewel of the British empire and had been built with increased lifting capacity, and was the world’s largest flying vessel. Unfortunately the storyline is a bit more interesting than the song itself which tends to again get laborious to listen to.

Perhaps the most difficult part of "The Book of Souls" for this Maiden fanatic is that there are moments of sheer awesome-ness that show off what the band has always been about and always done well. However for the most part the album as a whole just plods along and is a bit monotonous. I can't fault Maiden at this point for wanting to do what they want to do. They are metal legends. However, that doesn't mean as fans have to like everything they do.

Good review Ult. I would agree with you on most points. I love Maiden and enjoy most of their stuff but this one is just too bloated for me. I like parts of it but I just can't hang with it for the duration.

I agree with the review as well. Good songs on it but just a bit too much. It is Maiden and I still enjoy it though.

Excellent review, Ult.

For me, knowing the epic length of the album going in definitely helps. I know what I am in for when I spin it. In contrast, I find "Matter" and "Frontier" to be a chore to get through on a consistent basis. In the case of "Book of Souls" because it's all music and not long dreamy interludes and intros between the songs that just seems to drag the album down (lookin' at you "Nostradamus") and breaks up the flow. Honest truth is I am surprised how fast it actually goes by when I cue it up and read a book or just hang out at HoM. I really didn't think it would be this way when I got it that first Friday. I figured I would play it through and then pick my faves for a comp, same as I had done with the last few Maiden releases.

Oh, as a side note, since the reunion in 2000, the gap between new releases is getting longer (from 3 to 5 years) so I hope this isn't the last hurrah and they used up all the song ideas for the future. This is probably not the case but I am keeping my fingers crossed.

Thanks. I waited for the hype to die a little before I listened to this and wrote my review. As usual you get the guys who say "masterpiece" and "best thing they've ever recorded" immediately. I understand being a fanatic. I get that way about some bands. I myself love Maiden, but I can't see how any Maiden fan could think this was their best album ever.

On a side note I also can't understand Maiden fans of the 80s hating all of the reunion albums out of hand. And I've run across a lot of them on the internet. I get it, some people want a band to do 1 thing and continue doing that 1 thing for 40 years. But I don't know many musicians that want to paint themselves into the same kind of corners that the fans want them to.

My personal take.

1. I love 80s Maiden (both singers).

2. I really didn't like much of 90s Maiden. A few songs on Fear Of The Dark and that's about it for the entire decade. I lost interest around that time and didn't buy another Maiden release until after I saw the Rock In Rio DVD in 2001. I like a few of the Blaze era songs...but only the live versions that Bruce has done since rejoining (Man On The Edge, The Clansman and especially the live version of Sign Of The Cross from Rock In Rio - that is their most impressive prog-leaning jam).

3. I like a good bit of the reunion albums. I don't mind that it's different than the 80s material because I'm also different than I was in the 80s. I feel each album has some strong tracks and also some not-so-strong tracks.

4. I don't consider the reunion era to be "Prog Maiden". It may sound like prog to metal fans, but it really doesn't sound like prog to prog fans.

I get that. I definitely don't hate this album outright, in fact, I like much of it. I just don't think it's the best thing they've ever recorded. I wonder if a new band had put this record out if people would give it as much time and spend as much energy trying to digest it.

Also agree, it's not prog rock to me either.

I put together my own "LP EDIT" of The Book of Souls. Picking my favorite tracks and then reordering them to more closely capture the flow of an 80s style Iron Maiden album.

It's actually a fairly punchy listen and there are plenty of leftovers for a second volume.

The Book of Souls - LP variation.

Side One (approx 24 minutes)
1. If Eternity Should Fail
2. Speed of Light
3. Tears of a Clown
4. When The River Runs Deep

Side Two (approx 22 minutes)
1. Death Or Glory
2. The Great Unknown
3. The Book of Souls

Flows pretty nicely this way.

I do think that The Book Of Souls is the best they have done since BNW.

S.D. wrote:

3. I like a good bit of the reunion albums. I don't mind that it's different than the 80s material because I'm also different than I was in the 80s. I feel each album has some strong tracks and also some not-so-strong tracks.

4. I don't consider the reunion era to be "Prog Maiden". It may sound like prog to metal fans, but it really doesn't sound like prog to prog fans. Razz

Two excellent points, sir!

I find it unfathomable that fans of a band who have been around 30 - 40 years would proclaim the newest effort from said band as the "greatest thing ever recorded" by that band. Imho, that does a disservice to everything that band has done in a long and storied career. The next Dream Theater, Kiss, Dokken, or Megadeth albums could be amazing but in no way would surpass their early output or be their "best" recording. Maybe a band that has been around a long time (moderate success decades ago) but have only a handful of releases could release their "crowning achievement" at the end of their career? Maybe?

"Book of Souls" is certainly Maiden's Magnum Opus, but it's not their masterpiece.

Side note: one of the employees at the local record store I frequent was cranking this there earlier tonight.

Agree with SD on the not prog. I love the album and think it is fantastic. Best they have done? Only time will tell and I am hesitant to rank it until I have lived with it for at least a year. In the mean time, I am loving it. I absolutely love the post reunion albums and am a bigger fan because of the albums (and concerts.)

Most of the hardcore fans I know love it, with a few that don't.

I am really looking forward to seeing the new trailer tracks live!

I'm still enjoying The Book of Souls as much as I did upon my first listen. While it might not be their greatest ever or what have you, I think it's their best since Brave New World. It grabbed me by the short & curlies right away and hasn't let up.

I think because they divvied up into 2 discs, the length isn't an issue for me. I do notice that I tend to listen to one disc (either one), then something else, then come back later for another helping, so maybe that's it. It's like getting 2 separate albums, like when GnR put out the Use You Illusion albums. Playing them both back-to-back might seem like a chore, but individually, they hold up just fine as stand-alone albums.