I've got one. I really don't know why everyone freaks out about JMX writing lyrics. I don't think they're that great. Other than BAI, which I really like.. but then again, JP helped with that one, so who knows what JMX actually wrote. But I really don't see what the deal is with songs like Lifting Shadows.
I think why people like JM lyrics is cuz he writes "cryptic" lyrics in that they give the listener breathing room to interpret them how they want. Kevin Moore wrote the same way. Most of the other guys write "literal" lyrics that are just so obvious what the song is about and it really stifles any opportunity for the listener to have a personal connection unless they can directly relate to them.
I broadly agree with Lord of the Strings, but I do like it when JM contributes simply because it adds another voice to the band.
I do think John's lyrics are a little samey, though, and they threaten to become word salad in places. They've got pleasant imagery, and they're broadly uplifting, but I think he's a good lyricist with his own strengths and flaws just like any of the others. I also think that as he writes so sparingly, we don't see as much of the weakness or the repetition as we have and do with other lyricists. If Myung was writing seven songs per album and Petrucci was writing one every four years(ish) I don't think the band's lyrics would be any better. Again, just different strengths and weaknesses. Same goes for Kev! Perfectly good writer, interesting stuff to say and he expresses it well, but he's not exceptional.
Honestly, my least favourite DT lyricist? Early-90s Petrucci. It's pleasant, but it's... just nonsense, isn't it? Even
he couldn't tell you what Under a Glass Moon is about. Much better nowadays. Misunderstood is, in my (possibly controversial, possibly not!) opinion, the band's finest lyrical moment. It's the balance. It's evocative, plenty of images, parallels, but it's also close enough to be relatable. Makes you
feel something. "Never use a long word when a short one will do" - George Orwell! Wrapping your point in layer upon layer of abstract imagery and metaphor isn't a good way to connect to your listener. UaGM sounds pretty enough, but I couldn't be more disconnected if I tried.
This also goes for a lot of fan favourites - Voices, Scarred. I'm glad someone else is getting something from them. That's grand, I'm glad they're as popular as they are, and it's clearly me who's missing out. But I
am missing out. I'm just getting a list of metaphors. Not cogent, there's no connection - Voices goes from a spider to an angel to an old man to a newsstand. It doesn't take me anywhere. I mean, yes, it takes me to a pool, and a window, and a newsagents, but that's not a journey, that's a slideshow. There's no comment, it's just "look at this spider." Erratic. Whatever it's alluding to, whatever statement it's making, it's not made within the song. I find it a bit - whisper it - dull!
Not that I'm saying diverse imagery can't work. Petrucci sticks with the disparate image thing for pretty much his whole career, but it's fair to say he improves as he goes along. Images feel connected in later songs. "Playing a lion being led to a cage, I turn from a thief to a beggar, from a god to God, save me," not only have you got a strong biblical imagery, but there's a very clear vein of strength-to-weakness. I'm sure there's something
like that in Voices, too, but you have to dig pretty deep, and possibly double check in an encyclopedia. The song's not making the statement.
Right, now, someone say something more controversial so nobody reads this! Bring back Mike Portnoy! John Myung looks better in white! David Prater was the only man who ever understood what Dream Theater really means!