DT's musical legacy - how important are they?

[Skeever]

Just as the thread says, really.

Obviously DT aren't as influential or important to pop culture as the Beatles, but where do they stack up?

Are they as important as, say, Iron Maiden or Rush?

DT obviously have earned the reverence of plenty of guitar players and drummers over the years, but just how influential are they?

[Anguyen92]

I'm sure somewhere, in the world, a group of kids listen to DT and think, "Man, I would love to do something like that one day."

In terms of importance, I don't think they are as important as Iron Maiden or Rush.  Maybe, a step down below it, as perhaps, imo, anyone that plays Prog Metal, nowadays, may have been inspired by DT in some form.

[Rodni Demental]

Hard to say, but personally, they've recently been one of my biggest influences and sources of inspiration for playing and learning music since I discovered them. I'm nobody in particular but I'm sure there are influential people or artists that DT have also influenced. I think we can safely say that despite the lack of major mainstream success, they've certainly had a subtle influence on many of todays musicians.

Also, I think they're only just under the radar so to speak. I remember I had heard of them for a good few years before I properly discovered them.

[Cyclopssss]

I'd say they were pretty important. I mean, together with Queensryche, Fates Warning, and Savatage, they pretty much put the genre of progressive metal/hard rock on the map.

[ReaPsTA]

They created the prog metal genre, but it's not a very important genre.

This stuff is very hard to say though. Someday, a prog metal band might become huge, meaning DT would be very important.

[bl5150]

Splitting hairs but I would say that they took prog metal to a new level and redefined it/popularised the term "prog metal" .  To me the pioneers/creators are Fates Warning, Queensryche,Savatage, Crimson Glory , Mercyful Fate , Metallica?? and even more obscure bands like Adramelch.

But to answer the question more directly - they're extremely important to progressive metal.  The question then is "how important is progressive metal"

[goo-goo]

S
But to answer the question more directly - they're extremely important to progressive metal.  The question then is "how important is progressive metal"

This is a great way to put it. DT is extremely important to the genre, but how many people in the world listen to prog metal? Less than 1% maybe?

[TheCountOfNYC]

I would say that they're the most influential band in the progressive metal genre, but that genre itself isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things. I will say that with the people I associate and especially the musicians I know, DT plays a bigger role than normal. However, even around my musician friends, I'm the only person who's truly a fan of them. I get the impression that more people are influenced by Petrucci, Rudess, Myung, Portnoy, and Mangini as players than they are by Dream Theater as a band.

[hefdaddy42]

They are important to me.

[kirksnosehair]

I would say that they're the most influential band in the progressive metal genre, but that genre itself isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things. I will say that with the people I associate and especially the musicians I know, DT plays a bigger role than normal. However, even around my musician friends, I'm the only person who's truly a fan of them. I get the impression that more people are influenced by Petrucci, Rudess, Myung, Portnoy, and Mangini as players than they are by Dream Theater as a band.

My experience has been similar to this.  Most of the guitarists I know have at least heard of Petrucci and some of them know he's in a band called Dream Theater, but that's about all they know.   That said, I think Dream Theater's legacy probably isn't going to be much bigger or wider than its current audience.  They're a music geek band that appeals to music geeks.  I mean, I think they accomplished some pretty amazing things in their time, but I'm afraid that 25 years from now things won't be much different than they are now.   Dream who?

[Calvin6s]

In their world, very important.  It's just not a very big world.

[ReaPsTA]

In their world, very important.  It's just not a very big world.

Yep.

[matthewmatt]

I agree with the aforementioned notion that their importance relies on the general acceptance of their genre by the general public.

As long as the music reviewers and so-called non-artificial music connoisseurs will prefer punk to metal, will praise the sound of muzak, and will dislike prog in general for "taking the music away from the masses" and being "pretentious" (they have done so since the 70's) and general public will listen to David Guetta, Avicii, Pitbull, Skrillex or Flo Rida (or Nirvana, or, if they want to be metal, metalcore), in short, as long as people will be that shallow and want their music "simple, stupid", I think Dream Theater (or metal in general) will resonate very little.
That's what the music industry wants, mind you, just kneel and disconnect, accept stupid, because it's much easier to produce stupid.
By the way, even Metallica became famous in the non-metal-listening crowds because of Nothing Else Matters - which is a song important for what it is (a popular song by a previously thrash band) than any hidden qualities within the song (since it's more or less a mediocre ballad and it's not metal at all).

Dream Theater might be important as far as prog metal is concerned, but prog metal is a marginal sub-genre of a marginal genre itself (i. e. metal) and until more people will consider it important, the legacy of DT is practically non-existent. No part of me believes they are actually more "important" than Iron Maiden from this point of view, since Maiden's crossover appeal is much greater (definitely more people know them or casually listen to them).
As for Rush, I honestly don't know. I know they're very popular, but that's 1.) mostly because of their synth-rock era (more people like, let alone know Moving Pictures than A Farewell to Kings) and 2.) I believe they're more well known in America (the continent) than here in Europe - here when people talk about prog, they're sure to first name Jethro Tull or Yes, with Rush almost an afterthought. Or maybe it's just the Czech Republic.

This all make me a bit sad, since when I think about the future, say, 60 years from now, there will be even less DT fans overall, since we're in the minority even now, many of us will be already dead by then and DT will not be only a band playing marginal genre, they will be then already defunct band, a band from history, playing marginal genre. I mean, how many Gentle Giant fans are out there, really?

So I say - f*ck importance, let's enjoy what's good and let's teach our children what good music is. I know it worked for me. 

[Outcrier]

Nothing wrong with punk or simple music though. Complexity doen't make anything automatically better either.

[Train of Naught]

Matthew's comment kinda annoyed me, you are only proving the point people make about DT fans being these music elitists that think popular music is "stupid" or "too simple".

[Anguyen92]

I think there can be still good current popular music that can be open-hearted that's not really watered down and made only for commercial success. 

In recent times, I've been listening to a lot of Zac Brown Band, which is a country band, and I do not think they fall too much into the negative cliches of today's country music (which is talking about trucks, beer, girls, and other stuff. Bro-country they call it?).  Anywho, Zac Brown Band has been getting great traction, has good popular tracks among their genre, their latest album released this year, went gold, and did a great job cross-promoting themselves to the rock market after working with Dave Grohl and doing a track with Chris Cornell. 

Most importantly, they do not seem to be fabricated or dumb down made only for the masses to consume their products only to fade away when the market is done with them.  They're like Foo Fighters.  Sure, it's nothing new or original or influential or complex, whatever, but they make good catchy popular songs that is enjoyable, genuine, and doesn't seem to be insulting and it so happens a lot of people really like it.  Nothing wrong with that. 

I just wish more of that would happen in the world in any genre.

[ResultsMayVary]

Splitting hairs but I would say that they took prog metal to a new level and redefined it/popularised the term "prog metal" .  To me the pioneers/creators are Fates Warning, Queensryche,Savatage, Crimson Glory , Mercyful Fate , Metallica?? and even more obscure bands like Adramelch.

But to answer the question more directly - they're extremely important to progressive metal.  The question then is "how important is progressive metal"

They simply made prog cool again. That is definitely impressive, though, based on how it become so unpopular in the late 70s through the 80s.

[Stadler]

I agree with the aforementioned notion that their importance relies on the general acceptance of their genre by the general public.

As long as the music reviewers and so-called non-artificial music connoisseurs will prefer punk to metal, will praise the sound of muzak, and will dislike prog in general for "taking the music away from the masses" and being "pretentious" (they have done so since the 70's) and general public will listen to David Guetta, Avicii, Pitbull, Skrillex or Flo Rida (or Nirvana, or, if they want to be metal, metalcore), in short, as long as people will be that shallow and want their music "simple, stupid", I think Dream Theater (or metal in general) will resonate very little.
That's what the music industry wants, mind you, just kneel and disconnect, accept stupid, because it's much easier to produce stupid.
By the way, even Metallica became famous in the non-metal-listening crowds because of Nothing Else Matters - which is a song important for what it is (a popular song by a previously thrash band) than any hidden qualities within the song (since it's more or less a mediocre ballad and it's not metal at all).

Dream Theater might be important as far as prog metal is concerned, but prog metal is a marginal sub-genre of a marginal genre itself (i. e. metal) and until more people will consider it important, the legacy of DT is practically non-existent. No part of me believes they are actually more "important" than Iron Maiden from this point of view, since Maiden's crossover appeal is much greater (definitely more people know them or casually listen to them).
As for Rush, I honestly don't know. I know they're very popular, but that's 1.) mostly because of their synth-rock era (more people like, let alone know Moving Pictures than A Farewell to Kings) and 2.) I believe they're more well known in America (the continent) than here in Europe - here when people talk about prog, they're sure to first name Jethro Tull or Yes, with Rush almost an afterthought. Or maybe it's just the Czech Republic.

This all make me a bit sad, since when I think about the future, say, 60 years from now, there will be even less DT fans overall, since we're in the minority even now, many of us will be already dead by then and DT will not be only a band playing marginal genre, they will be then already defunct band, a band from history, playing marginal genre. I mean, how many Gentle Giant fans are out there, really?

So I say - f*ck importance, let's enjoy what's good and let's teach our children what good music is. I know it worked for me. 

I hate this mindset beyond words.   That somehow what "I" like is superior than something someone else likes, or that there is some sort of "right" or "just" about liking some form of music over another.   Whether you think something "mediocre" or "simple" is utterly and completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, at least from a "history" perspective. 

I remember when I was a kid, I would get an album - Black Sabbath Vol. 4, or Yes Fragile - and I would pore over the liner notes, and listen to every second of both sides, and try to find certain passages with the phonograph needle, and it brought me joy.  Not because it was "prog", not because it was "complex", but because it made me feel good.  And the reality is, I could very easily (and did!) put on Billy Joel The Stranger or The Beatles and did the same thing, and it made me feel the same way.    And I am neither stupid nor representative of "the masses". 

And now, I watch my kid, and my teaching isn't "LISTEN TO DREAM THEATER!  OR PRE-BLACK ALBUM METALLICA!!", it's "listen to whatever moves you.  Make sure when you put on a song it touches you SOMEWHERE."   And what does she do?  Puts on One Direction.  And plays it over and over.  And reads all the liner notes.  And pores over little sections buried deep in non-single tracks.  AND LOVES IT.  And I wouldn't have it any other way.   Yeah, she thinks Maiden's stage sets are cool, and is old enough to know that Bruce Dickinson is a singular talent, but I can't and won't force her to like something she doesn't.  I just don't want her to like something because her friend does. 

There's a reason that music is popular, and not all of it is because of the "big bad record companies brainwashing us!".   I don't know where you are located (sounds like the Czech Republic; we might be related!) but check out a show called "Live From Daryl's House".  It's a show by Daryl Hall of Hall and Oates, and he brings a single talent on each episode and they play live and play a selection of their songs and Daryl's songs, and you get a good sense of who is talented and who isn't, and it has almost nothing to do with "how popular" they are.  There isn't an episode that goes by that I'm not pleasantly surprised by someone whose music I don't like but really is in it heart and soul. 

[Vandalism]

To me their legacy most importantly is the diversity of musical styles that they have brought together in their career, in any one of their albums or in just 1 song at times.

Contrary to the whole non mainstream perception, I more or less started my foray in western music (not just rock/metal) with Dream Theater (thru a good friend who is a big fan) and it was so helpful that now I never feel disconnected when I listen to any kind of music whatsoever including mainstream pop n other stuff and all is appreciated. It brought me closer to mainstream music!

Though later I did get biased towards heavy guitars overall but my point here is that rather than discussing their place in the prog, underground..whatever scene we should take a few steps back and look at "The Bigger Picture" that their Discography is such a perfect amalgamation of almost all music styles out there!

Another huge part of their legacy is the effort they put in Live performances. They are one of the best Live performers out there nailing their all too difficult songs day in day out. Watching their DVDs makes me feel its my duty to be perfectly comfortable with whatever I am playing on stage all the time.

[As I Am]

To me, they were VERY VERY important! To the music scene in general.....not much at all aside from MP.

[Tom Bombadil]

The amount of "DT clone" bands out there is enough to convince me they have been fairly important.

[Outcrier]

To me their legacy most importantly is the diversity of musical styles that they have brought together in their career, in any one of their albums or in just 1 song at times.

I don't think DT is so diverse as the fans say. Despite some sound changes from album to album, it's still prog rock/metal mainly (i guess this should be in the controversial opinions thread  )

[KevShmev]

To me their legacy most importantly is the diversity of musical styles that they have brought together in their career, in any one of their albums or in just 1 song at times.

I don't think DT is so diverse as the fans say. Despite some sound changes from album to album, it's still prog rock/metal mainly (i guess this should be in the controversial opinions thread  )

Agreed. 

[Lowdz]

To me their legacy most importantly is the diversity of musical styles that they have brought together in their career, in any one of their albums or in just 1 song at times.

I don't think DT is so diverse as the fans say. Despite some sound changes from album to album, it's still prog rock/metal mainly (i guess this should be in the controversial opinions thread  )

Although the general genre doesn't change, they are diverse in that their music incorporates many different styles and genres within the music. I'd say that makes them diverse.

[Rodni Demental]

^^^ I find you guys' points interesting. I was talking to a friend that I don't see very often the other day about music, and we were talking about music preferences and favourite bands. He asked me about some things and I listed a few of my favourite artists, and when I mentioned DT as one of them, I could just see his face change. Whatever it was that he thought about DT seemed to have some terrible negative preconceptions associated with them. 

It triggered an interesting discussion though about different musical styles and what we find appealing about different styles. But pretty much, I inquired a bit about why he felt the way he did about DT, and I gathered very quickly that he didn't actually know them very well, he must have just heard of them around and about and probably formed his conception through association with certain people and not really listening through the music. He didn't actually know a single song, but he was convinced that they were an incredibly one dimensional band and made a few comments about not liking power metal vocals and that it all sounded the same. And went on to explain how he's an "album guy" and some of his favourite bands do something different with each album and try new things. I tried to explain that DT do actually have a unique evolution to their music that's changed over time, and the diversity among their albums is one of the main reasons I generally enjoy listening to albums in their entirety these days (from most artists). They've also incorporated elements of many different styles and this is another aspect of what keeps me coming back, the variety.

He probably didn't believe me though because I probably lost my credibility as soon as I announced the bias of them being one of my favourite bands. Anyway, I thought it was interesting that DT supposedly do what this guy is looking for in his music, but he didn't feel that way about it. And then from what you guys are saying I think; well maybe DT don't have as much variety as I give them credit for. - There's still that consistent DT sound, it has range but it still feels like no matter what the music is doing, it's still coming from whatever limitations exists in the 'creative box' of, well the composers. No matter what they do, they still sound like.. themselves. Maybe this happens to all artists and it's merely a matter of perception of the composer or listener whether the sound changes. I'm sure there are probably cases with more or less obvious examples. So to some people DT have a lot of variety in style, but to another person, the overall tone and sound of the rock (or metal) instrumentation is instantly going to make a lot of it sound 'samey' no matter what.

I dunno, am I making any sense with this?   

[IDontNotDoThings]

^^ Chances are, he'd just heard some comments about their songs either being overly long or having all technicality & no passion (obviously not my opinion, but I have heard some people say this a few times).

[Lucien]

Dream Theater is an important part of a very unimportant world. So no, they're not very important.

[Bertielee]

They are important to me.

[Stadler]

I dunno, am I making any sense with this?   

Some of it is psychology, too.  Things we aren't familiar with sound different to us than things we are familiar with.   Ever hear a parent say "all that heavy metal sounds the same!!"?   Well, I thought that too when my daughter started playing One Direction, but now that I know the songs from repeated listening, they are NOT all the same, and in fact there are a number of different stylistic inflections on their songs.    When I first heard "I Don't Know" by Ozzy (and I was already a fan from Sabbath) I actually thought it might be Paul Stanley singing.  Now I know that to be utterly ridiculous, and I can't at all imagine what I was thinking (same with Games Without Frontiers - I thought it was Phil, and Kayleigh - I thought it might be Peter).   

[emtee]

My only comments would be that even though prog metal is a very small subset of rock music Portnoy and Petrucci sold a hell of a lot
of drums and guitars. MP specifically. He was/is all over the drums publications form many years and his endorsement moved a
buttload of product for Tama. Lots of people wanted to be 'like Mike'...

[TheCountOfNYC]

^^^ I find you guys' points interesting. I was talking to a friend that I don't see very often the other day about music, and we were talking about music preferences and favourite bands. He asked me about some things and I listed a few of my favourite artists, and when I mentioned DT as one of them, I could just see his face change. Whatever it was that he thought about DT seemed to have some terrible negative preconceptions associated with them. 

It triggered an interesting discussion though about different musical styles and what we find appealing about different styles. But pretty much, I inquired a bit about why he felt the way he did about DT, and I gathered very quickly that he didn't actually know them very well, he must have just heard of them around and about and probably formed his conception through association with certain people and not really listening through the music. He didn't actually know a single song, but he was convinced that they were an incredibly one dimensional band and made a few comments about not liking power metal vocals and that it all sounded the same. And went on to explain how he's an "album guy" and some of his favourite bands do something different with each album and try new things. I tried to explain that DT do actually have a unique evolution to their music that's changed over time, and the diversity among their albums is one of the main reasons I generally enjoy listening to albums in their entirety these days (from most artists). They've also incorporated elements of many different styles and this is another aspect of what keeps me coming back, the variety.

He probably didn't believe me though because I probably lost my credibility as soon as I announced the bias of them being one of my favourite bands. Anyway, I thought it was interesting that DT supposedly do what this guy is looking for in his music, but he didn't feel that way about it. And then from what you guys are saying I think; well maybe DT don't have as much variety as I give them credit for. - There's still that consistent DT sound, it has range but it still feels like no matter what the music is doing, it's still coming from whatever limitations exists in the 'creative box' of, well the composers. No matter what they do, they still sound like.. themselves. Maybe this happens to all artists and it's merely a matter of perception of the composer or listener whether the sound changes. I'm sure there are probably cases with more or less obvious examples. So to some people DT have a lot of variety in style, but to another person, the overall tone and sound of the rock (or metal) instrumentation is instantly going to make a lot of it sound 'samey' no matter what.

I dunno, am I making any sense with this?   

Well all bands have a certain sound that they maintain even when they change styles. I feel this is very important to do otherwise they lose their identity. Even when a band changes style from album to album, as a fan I still want to feel like I'm listening to the same band. But that goes back to the point that Stadler made. We as fans listen to the artists that we like enough to hear the differences from album to album or song to song but when someone unfamiliar with an artist hears a few songs by them for the first time, they won't be able to identify the stylistic changes but they will be able to identify the core sound almost immediately. And as I said before, that's not necessarily a bad thing. As an artist you want people to be able to recognize your music while still being able to change things up a little. That's why having a signature sound is so important. Without it, there would be nothing to tell the listener "this is Dream Theater" or "this is Megadeth". There would be no way to identify what artist is playing and make it difficult to decide if you like a band or not.

[Invisible]

I believe DT's legacy will be greater among musicians than it will be as cultural legacy. They came out too late to make an impact on that particular style, but a lot of guitar players will look up to JP as drummers will look at MP/MM, etc. When it comes to mentioning a guitar virtuoso, I always see Petrucci being mentioned at one point, even among people who never even heard Dream Theater. In fact, the band itself has become like one of those movies quite a number of people talk about but very few ever actually saw it. I heard them being mentioned all the time as "that band of very talented musicians", but when asking further it turns out most of the people never even heard a single song.

As for diversity, for a hard rock/metal band, they have a wide variety of styles, but not as much as some would make them to be. They basically covered almost every single aspect of metal and rock and a wide variety of pop and some little other ideas, but it's not as if they done a thing like Queen, where you can have a metal song next to a blues followed by a brazilian/latin kind of song followed by a '50s style song, etc. Dream Theater is a diverse band, but they mostly stick to their progressive rock/metal roots.