Iron Maiden
The Book of Souls

I would like Iron Maiden to become aware of two things: the first is that the longer duration of an album does not automatically make it better, and the second is that a singer does not need to hit higher notes to be considered good.
If the next album were written considering these two "rules," we might have a little masterpiece on our hands, but "The Book of Souls" is not quite there yet.

In the last three releases, we have witnessed a progressive lengthening of their works: "A Matter of Life and Death" was long, not easy to listen to but still full of undeniably interesting moments, "The Final Frontier" began to artificially extend the duration of songs by repeating refrains and choruses over and over, and now this "The Book of Souls" is even a double album... what do we have to expect?

We are facing a new Iron Maiden album from the new era (since Bruce's return, to be clear), no more, no less, and that should be enough for those who know them to describe it.

The opening is one of the best, with two tracks that have an exceptional drive: "If Eternity Should Fail" is one of the finest pieces of the last 15 years with a compelling chorus, a Dickinson in great form, and an instrumental part almost unusual for the Iron Maiden, while the single "Speed of Light" is beautiful, fast, easy to remember and sing: it will surely shine live, and perhaps also be one of the tracks you'll probably listen to the most.

From here on, what I mentioned earlier applies: tracks that have nice ideas, nice instrumental and vocal sections, but would definitely work better if they were cut and reduced to retain only the highlights, thus avoiding turning them into real "bricks," difficult to listen to all the way through and often repetitive. "The Red and the Black" is the emblem of this philosophy: a 13-and-a-half-minute track with a bass solo that serves as both intro and outro but is completely out of context, a pre-chorus that never repeats during the piece (what's the point of it?), endless glued and placed guitar phrases without much coherence, long and repeatedly sung verses, and a series of ooh-ooh-oohs that become a bit tiring in the long run. It's a shame because the chorus is beautiful, and I'm sure that by removing the excess, there would have been enough ideas to make a great song in full Maiden style despite a more than halved duration.

The other "problem" is, I'm sorry to say, the fact that many tracks force good old Bruce to sing too high notes; the issue is not that he can't do it, but this "stylistic exercise" highlights all the limitations of the voice of the one who was the "air raid siren" but now has vocal cords 30 years older. In the tracks where this goal is not pushed, the results are very good, such as in "Tears of a Clown" and "The Man of Sorrow," which seem to come from something from the times of "The Chemical Wedding" and sound much more modern and current than the rest of the album, and especially have vocal lines that, without striving to reach the ultrasounds, allow Dickinson to express himself at his best.

Listen to the intro of "When the River Runs Deep" and try not to agree with me! Pity about this slip-up because, after these unnecessary high notes, the piece flows wonderfully, somewhat reminiscent of the rhythms of "Man on the Edge" but with a much sharper chorus. Two words also on the very long "Empire of the Clouds," the last track, which with its over 18 minutes, stands as a reminder that the length of the tracks is an integral part of this "The Book of Souls"; written by Bruce Dickinson himself, who we find also in the unusual role of pianist, it's a mini-suite decidedly inspired in the first part while it loses a bit of its bite in the second due to instrumentals that, in my opinion, are too lengthy. Again, at the end, Dickinson tries to stretch his vocal cords to the limit, causing a "strangulation" effect that does no justice to his beautiful voice.

In conclusion, my judgment on this "The Book of Souls" echoes in many ways what I had given to "The Final Frontier," while considering it qualitatively superior to its predecessor: it is an album too long and heavy to listen to, and it would have sufficed to maintain only the best parts of the tracks by reducing their duration to make it much more enjoyable, because if it's true that we haven't heard anything new for 5 years, it's not necessary to feed us everything that's been written between albums trying to forcefully fit it into the new work.

That said, Iron Maiden certainly don't need judgments, because I'm sure they'll know how to win us over live as they always have, and we'll all be there singing the oooh-oooh-ooohs of "The Red and the Black" as if nothing happened, waiting to sing "The Trooper" and "Hallowed Be Thy Name" right after.

UP THE IRONS!!!