Agreed 100% but think about it. They would never make triumph of steel and louder than hell with Ross. This also means they would never become a stadium/arena band, In a way Ross the boss is what kept the band on a garage, club band level. Albeit a very good one!
Err... Manowar a stadium band? Ross keeping the band at garage level? Phew! What's that planet called you are from? If all, I'd say Ross contributed LARGELY to the rise of Manowar, and they would never be where they are without his input! I go even further and say everything after "Kings Of Metal" was either totally overladden with pathos or so restricted you could also call it dumb... I agree "Triumph Of Steel" and "Louder Than Hell" would definitely have sounded differently than they do - musically better! Those two albums (and everything else that came after) sound somewhat hollow... I said it before, I wasn't aware of Ross's importance until I heard "Ross The Boss" (the band) - since then, I know what I miss with Manowar from 1990 on onwards. However, I guess I know what you mean: Manowar are far from being a Biker band ever since "Triumph Of Steel". Ross delivered a certain grounded attitude, and one can argue "down to earth" is the opposite of what Manowar aim(ed) for. Without him, Joey could realize his vision uncompromised, and if that is what you favour, than the better for you. I for one think Ross balanced that pathos out with his ideas, and his riffage is far more interesting than Joey's anyway. Still, Joey writes great songs, I think "Warriors Of The World" was splendidly fantastic.
Club band level???? They were already playing arena's etc.... For me...far more interesting band...and sound with Ross in the band.
Definitely. All the albums Ross recorded are classics and no album after his time even come close. BUT the super polished sound that they achieved later on is what cemented Manowar as headliners and able to reach to large audiences as seen on the Hell on Earth / magic circle tours. Ross was definetelly their biggest loss, but it allowed Joey to go full-retard on the "kings of metal" approach.
Sorry, but I disagree. It's not a super polished sound that cemented them as headliners, it was part of their image from day one: Manowar never play as a supporting act (at least that's what they say), so that's that. The "large" (a rather relative and forgiving word) audiences on the Magic Circle tours you speak of are the concrete consequence, especially if you struggle to find collaborative organizers: If no one wants to, you do it by yourself (dead-cheap prices are also always helpful) - and now, just guess who might be the headliner on such a self-organized festival? IMO, Manowar did two admirable things only: - great music in the 80ties - soldiering on through the 90ties Everything else is in consequence to that or derives from it: Big sound is achieved with big bucks, and metal fans tend to be very loyal - THAT's what keeps them alive.
Not to my knowledge, and I wouldn't even say they played big halls before 1990 - but you're evading... I referred to your theory on what "cemented Manowar as headliners", namely a "super polished sound" - something I don't agree with because of my already given explanation. Building up during the 80ties and staying true throughout the 90ties has ZERO to do with how big their venues were before 1990. But hey, maybe there's just a misconception: They definitely had bigger commercial success after Ross left than during his tenure - it's just that I don't think it was BECAUSE Ross left. In that aspect, I see Manowar similar to AC/DC: They made unbelievably more money after Bon Scott had died, but it was him who took them there - 'ts all good, mate!
Unlike other bands who are hilariously serious. Manowar are probably similar to Laibach, who are so over the top serious in their ridiculousness, its hard to tell. Although this is my favourite thing about ultra serious bands, and often I pretend that they are actually performing dark comedy. It's the little things in life....
Does it really matter? I'm reasonably persuaded there are harder cores of true Metallians in parts of central and eastern Europe where due to the privations of old style Soviet rule and Balkan war, they found in The Creed a catharsis not much else in music could deliver; see the old "scream for me, Sarajevo" Bruce Dickinson type affair (which aired on UK TV recently) in which I saw the high tensile emotional investment in Metal of fans whose passion had been wrought in cualdrons of woe most in 'the West' can thank their personal Gods they've never known. I'm not saying Manowar directly align in the manner of almighty Bruce but their 'message,' howsoever nebulously defined or interpreted, probably finds a more willing audience across such lands.
Actually, I've often programmed the CD to start with Metal Warriors and leave Achilles for last. Achilles is good, but it's not a satisfying opener.
1-Metal Warriors 5/5 2-Ride The Dragon 5/5 3-Spirit Horse Of The Cherokee 5/5 4-Burning 5/5 5-The Power Of Thy Sword 5/5 6-The Demon's Whip 5/5 (7-Master Of The Wind) 5/5 You can even "remove" Master Of The Wind (like a bonus track) if you want to end up on their best finish ever : "The Demon's Whip" (6'12 to the end.) And you are still at 35'15 in duration. No filler, best lineup, serious like hell, best full cover/poster ever... (I listen Achilles alone. This is an album for me).
I'd never remove Master Of The Wind. I like it a lot. And I wouldn't want to have Achilles all by its lonesome. I need something more when I feel like having a Manowar fix. What I should do one day is just find a better place for Achilles within the album. Maybe after The Power Of Thy Sword. Then coming from Achilles I could see the next two tracks as an encore of sorts, going into the blast of Demon's Whip before letting Master Of The Wind wind things down as the closer.
How more serious can any band get? Hail To England & Sign Of The Hammer are the best albums here. Cheers!