Under a Glass Moon - Lost Not Forgotten structural similarity analysis

[Pax]

ABSTRACT

I'm sure most of you noticed the similarity between A Dramatic Turn of Events (ADTOE) songs with Images and Words (IAW) songs.
In these two (Under a Glass Moon (UAGM), Lost Not Forgotten (LNF)), the structural similarity is really high. In fact, the analysis has shown that the every single section of Under a Glass Moon has a counterpart in the ADTOE song. It should also be noted that the both songs use a relatively uncommon melodic major key with frequently lowered 2. degree by a half-step.


ANALYSIS

(Timestamps are taken from the following YouTube videos of the songs: UAGM - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEKTNtmKZEw; LNF - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCYgRUetoiA)


Under the Glass Moon:                                                                                                                                                      Lost Not Forgotten:

                                                                                                  Keyboard intro, the only section not present in UAGM  -  0:00 - 0:42
0:00 - 0:26  -  Main theme without the rhythmic accompaniment  ------------------------------------------------------  0:42 - 1:12
0:26 - 0:52  -  Main theme with progressively higher notes of the same harmony, drum plays rhythm of the next riff  -  1:12 - 1:42
0:52 - 1:02  -  Riff with mostly tonic note (riff 1), same rhythm as bass drum  -----------------------------------------  1:42 - 1:53
1:02 - 1:06  -  Fill before the unstable section  --------------------------------------------------------------------------  1:53 - 1:58
1:06 - 1:19  -  Tonally unstable section with multiple rhythm changes  -------------------------------------------------  1:58 - 2:31
1:19 - 1:29  -  Verse riff, mostly tonic note (riff 2)  ---------------------------------------------------------------------  2:31 - 2:46
1:29 - 1:49  -  Verse riff with the singing  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------  2:46 - 3:16
1:49 - 2:08  -  Pre-chorus  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  3:16 - 3:46
2:08 - 2:35  -  Chorus with four verse, drums in 1. and 3. verse play in counter-rhythm in relation to 2. and 4.  -------  3:46 - 4:27
2:35 - 2:51  -  Modified riff 1, drums change rhythm multiple times  ----------------------------------------------------  4:27 - 4:43
2:51 - 3:18  -  The second stanza, more developed bass line  ----------------------------------------------------------  4:43 - 5:21
3:18 - 3:31  -  Different pre-chorus  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  5:21 - 5:40
3:31 - 3:59  -  Chorus for the second time, same rhythm as the first one  ----------------------------------------------  5:40 - 6:22
3:59 - 4:17  -  Bridge theme played on keyboard  -----------------------------------------------------------------------  6:22 - 6:45
4:17 - 4:26  -  Guitar joins keyboard in the bridge melody  --------------------------------------------------------------  6:45 - 6:57
4:26 - 4:35  -  Drums start playing rhythm  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------  6:57 - 7:09
4:35 - 4:37  -  Instrumental break, one instrument keeps playing and leading to guitar solo  ---------------------------  7:09 - 7:10
4:37 - 5:29  -  Guitar solo, keyboard and bass guitar play independent melodies in the background  -------------------  7:10 - 8:06
5:29 - 5:47  -  New rhythm on drums, before the keyboard solo starts  -------------------------------------------------  8:06 - 8:21
5:47 - 6:10  -  Keyboard solo  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  8:21 - 8:51
6:10 - 6:21  -  Instruments play homorhythmic bridge  -----------------------------------------------------------------  8:51 - 9:03
6:21 - 6:48  -  Chorus for the final time, this time, drums are not switching rhythm between verse like first two times  -  9:03 - 9:46
6:48 - 6:58  -  Main theme  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  9:46 - 10:01
6:58 - 7:01  -  Ending with the motif from riff 1  -------------------------------------------------------------------------  10:01 - 10:06


NOTE

I apologize if I named some terms wrong, I'm not a native English speaker and I've studied musical theory in Serbian. Anyways, I hope you'll be able to understand everything I wrote, and that you'll like it. Feel free to add comments

[Mladen]

'de si, brate? (Serbian for "what's up, buddy?", just so that the mods aren't concerned)

Anyway, this again? 

There was a lot of talk about structural similarities between IAW and ADTOE songs back when ADTOE came out, but I was never really bothered by it. I see the analysis as some sort of conspiracy theory, it makes sense but the ones who came up with it had a lot of time on their hands, obviously. Nothing bad about the analysis itself, it only goes too far once people start talking about the band losing inspiration and copying their early material in order to sound like Dream Theater again.

[Tomislav95]

There is a big difference between those two: Under a Glass Moon is good song. Thank You.

[hefdaddy42]

This kind of thing has been done to death.  Nothing new here.

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

lol

[Kotowboy]

ABSTRACT

I'm sure most of you noticed the similarity between A Dramatic Turn of Events (ADTOE) songs with Images and Words (IAW) songs.

A couple of people claimed to have. The rest of us were told we did.

[Kotowboy]

'de si, brate? (Serbian for "what's up, buddy?", just so that the mods aren't concerned)

This old subject is very de si brete

[ZKX-2099]

I wish somebody would just make a video with the two songs layered over eachother to end this debate.

One for On The Backs Of Angels/Pull Me Under as well.

[Crow]

i've been saying this for years that they're literally the same song but thanks for this 

[bosk1]

They aren't "literally the same song."  While there is plenty of room for opinions about "similarity," the statement that they are "literally the same song" is literally wrong.

As Hef said, this has kind of been discussed to death.  There are definite similarities and parallels that can be drawn between UAGM and Lost Not Forgotten.  The same can be said of On The Backs Of Angels and Pull Me Under.  Exactly how similar those songs are in terms of structure and similar musical elements really just depends on how you describe them.  As the OP illustrates, you can create descriptions that make them appear structurally almost identical.  Personally, I feel that such descriptions are reaching and stretching a bit.  But that said, the similarities are still obviously there, and the number of similarities between songs on the two albums are significant enough that it makes me believe it was intentional.  And that's fine.  But I am fairly comfortable with the opinion that they were intended to be only some very general similarities, and that the creative minds of fans in overanalyzing have read in a lot of similarities that are not intended.

[ZKX-2099]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rZLe7LjihE

There we go.

[ZKX-2099]

I always forget how much I like Pull Me Under till I hear it.

[Kotowboy]

People who care :

1. Portnoy - passively aggressively trying to stir up shit.

2. MP Warriors - using it as "proof" that DT 'can't do anything original without MP'.

[BlobVanDam]

ABSTRACT

I'm sure most of you noticed the similarity between A Dramatic Turn of Events (ADTOE) songs with Images and Words (IAW) songs.

A couple of people claimed to have. The rest of us were told we did.

To me the similarity between UGAM and LNF was blatant from first listen (not the rest though, which I think are just trying to fit the theory).

[Ben_Jamin]

I can hear the structure similarities. But thats about it with the influences, which I don't mind at all.

[Kotowboy]

Two songs have a similar form - for some reason has become a big deal.


 


If MP hadn't said anything then this theory would have never blown up like it has.

Wasn't there an AMob song that has the exact same riff as a DT song ? 

[Stadler]

People who care :

1. Portnoy - passively aggressively trying to stir up shit.

2. MP Warriors - using it as "proof" that DT 'can't do anything original without MP'.

Please.  If the constant comparison of songs from I&W and ADTOE is "tired" then this s***-stirring is down-right exhausted.   If "MP Warriors" means "fans of Mike, grateful for all he did, and considers it a loss that he's gone" then I'm probably in that group, and I could care less about "similarities" or "song structure".  As far as I can recall, he made ONE COMMENT on that.   He let it go, so why not take the hint?

[Crow]

i've prob also said this a thousand times but i can't listen to LNF without feeling like i should be listening to UAGM instead
it has nothing to do with portnoy, and it's really the only song on the album that parallels an I&W song this strongly (OTBOA is the only other that's really somewhat similar, too, tbh) but, bleh

[Train of Naught]

It's not like DT is the first band that repeats a formula to make songs, although I think they do it WAY less than other bands, look at Rage Against the Machine for instance, one of the most obvious ones. You would run out of material pretty quickly if you did a completely different structure for every song.

[ResultsMayVary]

I remember when that Thiago guy showed up here with similar analysis (although he did it with multiple songs). He eventually got banned for insulting people when they didn't agree that ADTOE was a complete re-write of I&W. The dude has a hell of a temper and seems to be regarded as an asshat.

That being said, these two songs and OTBOA/PMU have some similarities. It's not that hard to see.

[gmillerdrake]

he made ONE COMMENT on that.   

I know for a fact this isn't true but it doesn't really matter....this argument has been had over and over. 

[bosk1]

He let it go, so why not take the hint?

While Kowtow sarcastically overstated the point, the reason why he likely is not "taking the hint" and "letting it go" is because this thread exists.  This thread is, by definition, not letting it go.  People are entitled to respond.

[425]

People who care :

1. Portnoy - passively aggressively trying to stir up shit.

MP may have slightly cared in 2011. No chance he still cares in 2015.

i've prob also said this a thousand times but i can't listen to LNF without feeling like i should be listening to UAGM instead
it has nothing to do with portnoy, and it's really the only song on the album that parallels an I&W song this strongly (OTBOA is the only other that's really somewhat similar, too, tbh) but, bleh

I'd say that OTBOA/PMU is a much stronger parallel, but it doesn't really matter because the songs are different enough anyway. LNF may be structurally similar, but it's different melodically and in terms of mood and vibe.

[TheSilentHam]

... LNF may be structurally similar, but it's different melodically and in terms of mood and vibe.

^This.  I like both UAGM and LNF for what they are.  I use LNF to introduce metal fans to DT.  It was disappointing to not see LNF live (wasn't in the set list yet).  Really it's amazing to me how different they are given the structural similarities.  Even more amazing that a band with this many studio albums doesn't have blatant cookie cutter filler songs (imo - I'm sure many would argue exactly opposite).

[Calvin6s]

but the ones who came up with it had a lot of time on their hands, obviously.

Yes, because taking the time to understand music beyond an emotional level is "too much time on your hands", but endlessly talking about Portnoy's departure, Petrucci's beard, etc, etc is perfectly fine.

This is how I saw the debate unfold:
- Hey, I've noticed some similarities
- How dare you
- No, I'm serious
- You just hate the band.  Bands can repeat themselves
- This is more than just repeating your style
- You are making this up.  I don't hear it
- Well, I just hear it, but I'll break it down for you to help you hear it
- Too much time on your hands

Maybe just give the analysis a chance and possibly learn something?

[The Presence of Frenemies]

but the ones who came up with it had a lot of time on their hands, obviously.

Yes, because taking the time to understand music beyond an emotional level is "too much time on your hands", but endlessly talking about Portnoy's departure, Petrucci's beard, etc, etc is perfectly fine.

This is how I saw the debate unfold:
- Hey, I've noticed some similarities
- How dare you
- No, I'm serious
- You just hate the band.  Bands can repeat themselves
- This is more than just repeating your style
- You are making this up.  I don't hear it
- Well, I just hear it, but I'll break it down for you to help you hear it
- Too much time on your hands

Maybe just give the analysis a chance and possibly learn something?

Pretty much. From its inception, this debate always sets off a spectacular failure of communication. It's either you hear the similiarities and thus are "stirring shit up that doesn't exist," or you don't and are thus "an ignorant, butthurt fanboy who won't acknowledge reality." Or some such.

These are the relevant points that need to be made with the discussion. I'm shocked how rarely I see them.

1) There are, undoubtedly, massive structural similarities with OTBOA, LNF, and the first half of BAI, at the least.

2) These structural similarities do not encompass all of ADTOE. Certainly, it would be ridiculous to say BMUBMD sounds like anything on I&W (or really anything else in the DT catalog) and BTS obviously stands on its own, just to name two clear examples. So obviously the whole album is not a (structural) copy of I&W.

3) Bands do, indeed, copy song structures all the time. But most bands don't have DT song structures. The I&W songs in question here all have some pretty unique characteristics to them that you don't often see. Take PMU, for example. The very long intro with just acoustic guitar and then the tom-heavy drum riff, the odd staccato riff before the vocals enter, the pre-chorus guitar lead break, the keyboard break between verse 1 and 2, the soft keyboard solo that then goes to the bigger guitar solo, the guitar solo transitioning back into the pre-chorus lead...that's a lot of unique flourishes even in the world of DT music. And then OTBOA reuses every single one of them. It wouldn't be news if DT13 contained songs with the same structure as, say, I Walk Beside You and Wither (though I suppose having two such ones would be a bit uncharacteristic). Those songs have what--eight parts? Ten? And those parts are mostly things songs have to have, like verses and choruses. When you're at 24-for-24 or something, with a lot of nontraditional parts, that's at the very least a strong indicator it's not mere coincidence.

4) If you admit point #3, that does not mean you think OTBOA, LNF, etc. suck. In fact, the complexity of the DT sound (not to mention the production differences and member changes from 1992 to 2011) ensures that the songs really do have a different vibe to them. So the exact reason that it's something people notice is the same reason it's not really something to be upset about! Mind you, I prefer the I&W tracks by quite a bit, and I think ADTOE is their worst James-era album. But even though I acknowledge the structural similarities, I don't think the band committed some great sin with them, or that they did so because they were creatively bankrupt. And I would think that most who acknowledge the similarities probably agree with that. I can't claim to know their motivation, but I don't really have an issue with it. I think the ADTOE songs are pretty good but not great, and that's not because they're dragged down by being like I&W, it's because the little things around the edges (James in a lower register, the poor ADTOE production, slightly less compelling instrumentation) that changed.

So, in sum, it is possible to hold, at the same time, that yes, Dream Theater did reuse some I&W structures for ADTOE songs and that no, that does not make them or these songs bad. And so, ultimately, it's more interesting curiosity than big controversy, really.

[TheCountOfNYC]

ABSTRACT

I'm sure most of you noticed the similarity between A Dramatic Turn of Events (ADTOE) songs with Images and Words (IAW) songs.

A couple of people claimed to have. The rest of us were told we did.

To me the similarity between UGAM and LNF was blatant from first listen (not the rest though, which I think are just trying to fit the theory).

I hear structural similarities with PMU and OTBoA, WfS/LtL and FfH/BAI, and Metropolis and Outcry but the structures of UaGM and LnF are identical other than the piano intro in LnF. However, this does not make one a ripoff of the other or lessen the newer song's quality for me. Considering ADToE is my fourth favorite DT album (IaW is second), I clearly don't care about the similarities.

[bosk1]

but the ones who came up with it had a lot of time on their hands, obviously.

Yes, because taking the time to understand music beyond an emotional level is "too much time on your hands", but endlessly talking about Portnoy's departure, Petrucci's beard, etc, etc is perfectly fine.

This is how I saw the debate unfold:
- Hey, I've noticed some similarities
- How dare you
- No, I'm serious
- You just hate the band.  Bands can repeat themselves
- This is more than just repeating your style
- You are making this up.  I don't hear it
- Well, I just hear it, but I'll break it down for you to help you hear it
- Too much time on your hands

Maybe just give the analysis a chance and possibly learn something?

Pretty much. From its inception, this debate always sets off a spectacular failure of communication. It's either you hear the similiarities and thus are "stirring shit up that doesn't exist," or you don't and are thus "an ignorant, butthurt fanboy who won't acknowledge reality." Or some such.

Honestly, if that is what the two of you think the debate is about, you have very selective reading skills and weren't really paying attention.

So, in sum, it is possible to hold, at the same time, that yes, Dream Theater did reuse some I&W structures for ADTOE songs and that no, that does not make them or these songs bad. And so, ultimately, it's more interesting curiosity than big controversy, really.

Of course.  I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. 

[Calvin6s]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rZLe7LjihE

There we go.

That was much better than I thought it would be

[The Presence of Frenemies]

but the ones who came up with it had a lot of time on their hands, obviously.

Yes, because taking the time to understand music beyond an emotional level is "too much time on your hands", but endlessly talking about Portnoy's departure, Petrucci's beard, etc, etc is perfectly fine.

This is how I saw the debate unfold:
- Hey, I've noticed some similarities
- How dare you
- No, I'm serious
- You just hate the band.  Bands can repeat themselves
- This is more than just repeating your style
- You are making this up.  I don't hear it
- Well, I just hear it, but I'll break it down for you to help you hear it
- Too much time on your hands

Maybe just give the analysis a chance and possibly learn something?

Pretty much. From its inception, this debate always sets off a spectacular failure of communication. It's either you hear the similiarities and thus are "stirring shit up that doesn't exist," or you don't and are thus "an ignorant, butthurt fanboy who won't acknowledge reality." Or some such.

Honestly, if that is what the two of you think the debate is about, you have very selective reading skills and weren't really paying attention.

You think so? Perhaps I'm mischaracterizing, as the discussion seems to get slightly more civil with time, though that positive change is mitigated by the increasing pointlessness of the exercise. But I think those that don't agree that there are similarities seem not to go to the hard evidence. Rarely, if ever, have I seen a refutation from that side that gets into specifics. It seems more that those on that side seem to think that an admission of similarity equates to one that the ADTOE songs are somehow unworthy or a sign of the band giving up. This likely stems from the abrasiveness with which the theory was first presented; my point was that most of its adherents see far less of the baggage than may be perceived. Perhaps you're right and it's indeed a superfluous point, but hey.

[Lucien]

I fail to see the issue with structural similarities between songs in a band's works

I mean, fuckin' half the god damn pop songs in the world (exaggeration) follow the same chord structure of I V IV VI (I V VI IV?)(imo it should be I IV VI V), and go verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-chorus. That song structure, I'll call it ABABCB, has been used in Dream Theater's music a ton, just like so many other bands. Does this similarity harm anything, or make the music any worse? No, it doesn't (won't start an objectivity in music argument here though ).

[Calvin6s]

Honestly, if that is what the two of you think the debate is about, you have very selective reading skills and weren't really paying attention.

I wasn't at DTF when ADToE was released.  I was at JP Forum, so I can't tell you what went on here.

But all you have to do is read this thread.  Somebody comes in and took the time to give a thoughtful breakdown of what they noticed, and it immediately went into the same old dance instead of discussing what was actually offered up for discussion.

I'll sum it up even more concisely:
DT used qute a few I&W song structures for ADToE.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.

That is essentially what became of that discussion.  A few took the time to have a back and forth over at the JP Forum about the actual similarities instead of endlessly discussing if it was taboo or rude or if there were some "conspiracy" or making it all about Thiago.

[me7]

Two excellent posts by Pax and The Presence of Enemies. Thank you.

[Mladen]

Maybe just give the analysis a chance and possibly learn something?

Oh, believe me, it's been almost four years since this thing but I still remember being very entertained by the deep analysis and connections found between UAGM and LNF, as well as PMU and OTBOA. It was only after a little while that people started coming up with other theories, probably just with the intention of disregarding A Dramatic turn of events as a lazy copy of Images and words. We had a bit of fun with the similarities at first, nobody denied them and pretended like they didn't hear them - but then it became an excuse for former fans to bash the album, which I thought wasn't about analysis and learning anymore.

[Stadler]

He let it go, so why not take the hint?

While Kowtow sarcastically overstated the point, the reason why he likely is not "taking the hint" and "letting it go" is because this thread exists.  This thread is, by definition, not letting it go.  People are entitled to respond.

Fair point; but the thread is on the similarities of songs.   I was talking specifically about the bashing of Mike as a result and those that happen to support him.  I don't see why there can't be a reasoned, learned discussion of song structure without disparaging someone who wasn't even present when half the songs under analysis were written/recorded, let alone those that choose not to take sides in what has devolved into a petty argument.  This thread doesn't exist because of Mike Portnoy.