Written by Valentin B on 11.06.2010 at 09:39

but i'm gonna vote Paul. nowadays he's gone really bad, his vocals are just way too raspy, but his early recordings with Maiden were really fucking good.

I agree.
For me the first 4 Maiden albums are awesome. And you right Paul's was a fucking good. Even when Bruce was in his prime, I stiff preferred Paul's voice on the stuff from the first two albums.

I voted paule....why? Becaus the songs he did for maiden where better then when baze where in the band... when baze where in the band there was to much progressive metal... when Paul sang it was simpler and rougher..and in some times better
PS I'm

Written by Numbskull on 12.06.2010 at 01:21

Written by Valentin B on 11.06.2010 at 09:39

but i'm gonna vote Paul. nowadays he's gone really bad, his vocals are just way too raspy, but his early recordings with Maiden were really fucking good.

I agree.
For me the first 4 Maiden albums are awesome. And you right Paul's was a fucking good. Even when Bruce was in his prime, I stiff preferred Paul's voice on the stuff from the first two albums.

paul were amazing ♥ i love the first iron maiden's albums,blaze has a different voice, not suitable for the iron maiden's stuff in my opinion..and i hear blaze some months ago,I'm sure i don't like it at all, even live

Written by neb on 13.06.2010 at 15:42

Written by Numbskull on 12.06.2010 at 01:21

Written by Valentin B on 11.06.2010 at 09:39

but i'm gonna vote Paul. nowadays he's gone really bad, his vocals are just way too raspy, but his early recordings with Maiden were really fucking good.

I agree.
For me the first 4 Maiden albums are awesome. And you right Paul's was a fucking good. Even when Bruce was in his prime, I stiff preferred Paul's voice on the stuff from the first two albums.

paul were amazing ¢¾ i love the first iron maiden's albums,blaze has a different voice, not suitable for the iron maiden's stuff in my opinion..and i hear blaze some months ago,I'm sure i don't like it at all, even live

Blaze always looked out of place too. Maiden is happy and hopping around and Blaze seems to be more of Danzig presences on stage (dark and brooding). Not a good fit at all.

I'd say Paul cause his voice brought some punk to Iron Maiden's table.

But I have to give credit to Blaze, I mean, Iron Maiden must of chose him for a reason, right?

They chose him just because he was english, such a bad choice..
I wish they had chosen andre matos *_*

Written by neb on 18.06.2010 at 22:06

They chose him just because he was english, such a bad choice..
I wish they had chosen andre matos *_*

You're daydreaming; back in 1993 when Bruce left Maiden, Angra were newbies, just with a debut album; so how could Steve Harris and Co have heard of Andre Matos?

I'm such a party pooper

"Andre took part in a worldwide contest for replacing Bruce Dickinson in Iron Maiden and was in the Top 3 finalists alongside James LaBrie and eventual winner, Blaze Bayley."

http://progpowerusa.com/site/bands/andre-matos/

Written by neb on 18.06.2010 at 22:41

"Andre took part in a worldwide contest for replacing Bruce Dickinson in Iron Maiden and was in the Top 3 finalists alongside James LaBrie and eventual winner, Blaze Bayley."

http://progpowerusa.com/site/bands/andre-matos/

Sorry i played the fool; it seems to me not plausible for James labrie to be in that contest because in 1993 he had achieved success with Dream theater's images and Words and the band toured 92 and 93 realising Live at Marquee.

I remember back in '93, many magazines were stating that Michael kiske would have been the best choice.

I remember this thing of kiske too (I read it somewhere,I wasn't listening iron maiden when I was 5 eheh)but I also found this interview with andre on the web

"15 years ago you auditioned to replace Bruce Dickinson. If he were to leave Iron Maiden again, would the position still interest you?

If I could keep my solo career, Yes. That would be my condition.

So you don't think that youre too Brazilian to front a British band then?

(laughing) I think that's why the didn't choose me. Back then in 1993, the first Angra record was recorded but it hadn't been released yet and I was faced with a lot of confusion over this. Sanctuary/EMI was asking for my stuff and my band was very afraid that they were going to lose me but I told them that I didn't think they would choose me as I was from Brazil and was much younger than the rest of the Iron Maiden and they ended up choosing Blaze Bailey..."

I didn't understand at all (I guess I should thank my english teacher) but if he says it, it must be true..anyway,he thinks that blaze is not too adequate for Maiden's style, too

here's the link http://www.komodorock.com/interviews/interviews/komodo-rock-talks-with-andre-matos-2009012011142/

Written by 19Ninety-Three on 16.06.2010 at 22:56

But I have to give credit to Blaze, I mean, Iron Maiden must of chose him for a reason, right?

I never understood why they chose the first unknown guy they had at hand, only because Wolfsbane accompanied Maiden on tour.


As for the rumour about Kiske, I remember having heard about it back then.

It would have been awesome to have Kiske in Iron Maiden! I voted for Blazey, Paul is also pretty good but I think that Blazey is a little better.

I'm really surprised to see so many votes for D'Anno. I thought he sounded like a mix between punk and classic rock tones. I really didn't like it, and I have a hard time listening to the first two Maiden albums because of him. I did really like Blaze Bayley. X Factor was a wonderful album, and was honestly Maiden's best album inbetween 7th Son of a 7th Son and Brave New World. Virtual XI had some good songs on it like the Clansman that I really enjoyed.

I voted Di'anno because his style worked so well with the rest of the band. The early lineups just had a certain chemistry and you have to remember that when Paul was replaced many fans thought they would never be able to find a replacement. Needless to say they did find a perfect substitute, but that just shows how much Di'anno ment to Maiden.

I prefer to Paul because Iron Maiden and Killers are two of my favorite albums, and I think Paul is much better than Bailey.:gunner:

Well, considering that Killers is in the top 3 of my favorite Maiden albums, I have to go with Di'Anno. I've never really felt that Bayley was a good fit.

Di Anno, by FAR

I prefer the Paul Iron Maiden albums over the Blaze Iron Maiden albums, but prefer Blaze as a singer.

I prefer Dianno, I would have voted for Dianno even if it was Dianno vs Dickinson, I just prefer his rawer style.

Paul recorded 2 classic albums...and the punk atitude...

Blaze simply isn't to good of a singer... Plenty of other vocalists with a lower range sound better. Mike DiMeo comes to mind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U08Rm1aQLbM

So yeah, Paul Di'anno all the way. He just has a roughness to his voice that few others have. His post Maiden work isn't half bad either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KENdWnWsDs

26 people like false singing. I'm digusted.

Paul of course! Bayley lacks power nad presence in his singing; Paul had a unique way of singing.

Oh well, no shit Di'Anno's gonna win, I mean he sings way better than Bayley lol. Im not saying Bayley's bad but yeah comparing X factor and Virtual to Killers and Iron Maiden lol not a big contest obviously the first 2 albums are kicking more asses in every aspects including the singin.

I went for Di'Anno. At least his era had some great Maiden songs like Phantom Of The Opera. I think he's a very good vocalist. I don't like Blaze though...

Uncle Pauly

Blaze is good but i prefer Di'Anno.

Could you imagine if Bayley sung on Killers?

Could you imagine if Di'Anno sung on Virtual XI?

I think either of those would sound terrible. Both singers fit the musical style of Maiden within their timeframes. I absolutely love Bayley's work and since the Clansman is my favorite Maiden song of all time I have to vote for him!

Mr. Pauly D of course! IM's debut is one of my favorite albums by them.

Di'anno for Killers.