How much the tech skill in DT is important for you?

[Kotowboy]

So Vacant isn't a Dream Theater song.

It is. But if you have a whole album of Vacant and Anna Lee, is that a Dream Theater album?

That's pretty much what we got on TA and some people will tell you it is still Dream Theater.   

It is.

[erwinrafael]

So Vacant isn't a Dream Theater song.

It is. But if you have a whole album of Vacant and Anna Lee, is that a Dream Theater album?

That's pretty much what we got on TA and some people will tell you it is still Dream Theater.   

No, because the complexity of TA is seeing the whole, not in the individual songs.

[bosk1]

A lot of the individual songs are pretty complex as well, although they might sound straightforward upon just a casual listen. 

[RoeDent]

I've actually got a question related to this one. Would you accept less virtuosity (like fewer fast, technical passages) if it meant getting more new DT music? As the band get older, and their technical abilities undoubtedly start to dwindle (fingers don't move as quickly up and down the keyboard/fretboard), this is something we must consider.

[MirrorMask]

A lot of the individual songs are pretty complex as well, although they might sound straightforward upon just a casual listen.

Well, this is what I personally feel about the virtuosity: having enough skills to make complex things sound easy. Or even use them for clearly complex passages, that still sound musical and not the "wankery" as it is defined when being criticized.

I've actually got a question related to this one. Would you accept less virtuosity (like fewer fast, technical passages) if it meant getting more new DT music? As the band get older, and their technical abilities undoubtedly start to dwindle (fingers don't move as quickly up and down the keyboard/fretboard), this is something we must consider.

The Astonishing is the proof that they can still put out good quality music, with the occasional heavy fast passages, without the need for a gazillion notes per second. I would be fine with that.

Also, I don't think you need that many notes to be heavy - The Mirror is as heavy as it gets, the initial riff could fit in Pantera's catalogue, and still it is so simple: DA-DA-DA DA-DA-DA DA-DA- DA  PA-PA-PA PA-PA-PA PA-PA-PA DADADA, DADADA-DADADADA DADADA, DADADA-DADADADA etc... so simple and yet so heavy.

[bosk1]

The Astonishing is the proof that they can still put out good quality music, with the occasional heavy fast passages, without the need for a gazillion notes per second.

I think that, at any given point in their career, there has been PLENTY of proof of that.  The Astonishing doesn't need to be "the" proof.

[MirrorMask]

That goes without saying, I was more replying directly to the "What if they grow older and lose speed" scenario, since this is their most recent album.

[hefdaddy42]

So Vacant isn't a Dream Theater song.

It's the exception that proves the rule.

[Kotowboy]

I actually don't listen to DT *just* for the technicality. It was the songwriting first and foremost that drew me in.

[pcs90]

I love instrumentals. However, above everything else, the music needs to have an emotion. Many of my favorite moments in DT are Petrucci solos (BAI, LITS, TBOT etc,) or really big epic sections like the ending to TCOT or Octavarium.
Some of the complex sections are still very melodic. That's my favorite type of complexity, where it's still memorable. Some examples of great instrumental sections with lots of changes that are still musical include BF, BAI, Outcry, LTL, SDOIT and IT.
The stuff from DT I dislike are solos that are just runs with no feeling or emotion. Jordan is the most guilty of this. As much as I enjoy his playing, the leads he plays on his solo albums like Feeding The Wheel or Rhythm of Time are nearly all melodic while still being technical; however in DT the majority of his solos are more notes than music to me. Nearly all the solos from both JR and JP on TOT are like this. While that style of playing may require a ton of skill, it becomes boring and formulaic when there is no emotion.
So yes, technicality does matter, but what matters just as much (if not more) is the knowledge of when to use or not use that technicality in a song, and how to use it while still being melodic and emotional.

[MirrorMask]

So yes, technicality does matter, but what matters just as much (if not more) is the knowledge of when to use or not use that technicality in a song, and how to use it while still being melodic and emotional.

I basically agree with you.

[Prog Snob]

So Vacant isn't a Dream Theater song.

It is. But if you have a whole album of Vacant and Anna Lee, is that a Dream Theater album?

That's pretty much what we got on TA and some people will tell you it is still Dream Theater.   

[Tony From Long Island]

As the Late, Great Peppi Marchello once said  "Speed Ain't Nothing Without Class."

[Thoughtspart3]

The technicality is what drew me to DT.  Not everything has to be technical though.  They are at there greatest when they blend the technical WITH the melodic and emotional.  This is what really sets them apart.

[TheGreatPretender]

I don't think complexity always has to mean the fastest or the most time signature changes. It can be something that's simply more creative and throws something unexpected at you. And I think The Astonishing, for example, was great at this. You're listening to some cool, melodic rock tunes at first, and then Lord Nefaryus comes on, and it's a freaking tango beat. How many rock bands dabble in tango?
Then A Savior In The Square comes on, and aside from that progression from acoustic to heavy, you get to 3:21 and there's that choral bit, small as it may be, that immediately grabs attention. Point is, I think that kind of stuff is approached with the same mindset as anything fast and complex on their part.

But I never understood the criticism that DT (or that kind of stuff at all) is just for musicians and nerds. I mean, okay, maybe nerds in a sense that people who actively and passionately analyze things they like, but by that definition, everyone on earth is a nerd about SOMETHING. It may not be perfect for people who only listen to music passively, and only have enough attention span to enjoy simple, catchy hooks. But "not perfect" doesn't mean they wouldn't appreciate it. It's just a little foreign to them, and DT has plenty of catchier stuff to ease them into the idea, I think.

Kinda going off on a tangent there, but yeah, the bottom line is, I think technical skill fairly important for DT. Like the post above me says, their balance of the technical and the tasteful is precisely what sets them apart. They manage to find that balance, and not sacrifice either quality, and that's essentially what makes DT DT. If they abandoned their technical aspects, they'd still be a nice and pleasant band to listen to, but they'd be abandoning half of their identity. I don't agree that they did this with The Astonishing, but they did dial the complexity back a bit, and even then, people were already up in arms about the album, so yeah, clearly it's not an aspect that they could just take or leave.

[ytserush]

At this point, if I like the music and the organic passion and energy is there, that's all that matters to me.

[Architeuthis]

I remember on JP's Rock Discipline instructional video, he was talking about the importance of having technical skills. He was explaining that the more tricks and skills you have on the instrument, the more freedom you have to express yourself musically and take your art to a higher level.
  It's easy to hear that perfect solo in your head, but if you don't have the chops to carry it out, it will never come to fruition.  I agree with that 100% 

[Kotowboy]

Having all the techniques in the world mean nothing if you can't write a good song.


I like The Astonishing more than most because I'm way more into songwriting than technical ability.

[bosk1]

Having all the techniques in the world mean nothing if you can't write a good song. 

Yes, but so what?  Technical ability and good song writing are not mutually exclusive.  Do you not grasp that?

[Kotowboy]

sigh...

[Kotowboy]

Re: How much the tech skill in DT is important for YOU?

Having all the techniques in the world mean nothing if you can't write a good song.

Can't you Grasp That ?

[bosk1]

Yes, but the false correlation you are trying to make between "tech skill" and "good song writing" has nothing to do with the question you purport to be answering.

[Kotowboy]

You're acting as though I said that being an incredibly technical guitar player *MEANS* you can't write a good song.

That's not what I meant at all. You just love bitching with me recently for no reason.

I meant that being an insanely technical guitar player doesn't mean you automatically write the best songs...


But to answer the original question in ways you can grasp -

Technical skill is not that important *TO ME*. They could release an album of 12 songs like Our New World and it wouldn't bother me if it was all 4/4

*IF* the songs were all great. If I want to listen to a really technical DT album there are plenty to choose from.

[Architeuthis]

Having all the techniques in the world mean nothing if you can't write a good song.


I like The Astonishing more than most because I'm way more into songwriting than technical ability.

The Astonishing has best of both worlds. Great songs with technical prowess throughout. Without their technical skills and musical knowledge, TA wouldn't be as good.

[cfmoran13]

Personally, I'll take better songs with less technical proficiency over super technical songs that suck.  I knew decades ago they were amazing musicians.  To me, their songwriting has wavered as of late.

[MirrorMask]

Personally, I'll take better songs with less technical proficiency over super technical songs that suck. 

Same here. Needless to say, nothing indicates that a song can't be BOTH technical AND nice sounding, there are plently examples of this in DT's discography, but in the extreme example you made, I'd go for the former choice too.

[erwinrafael]

Personally, I'll take better songs with less technical proficiency over super technical songs that suck.  I knew decades ago they were amazing musicians.  To me, their songwriting has wavered as of late.

The songwriting has not wavered. Writing a two hour musical with recurring themes and full orchestra arrangement can not be done without considerable songwriting skills. They are just writing songs that do not suit your taste.

[Prog Snob]

Personally, I'll take better songs with less technical proficiency over super technical songs that suck.  I knew decades ago they were amazing musicians.  To me, their songwriting has wavered as of late.

I don't get that. I think with the last two albums they've done well at writing songs and not focusing on writing 10+ minute epics. That was JP's approach to DT12 and it paid off well. There are some great songs on that album.

[Siddhartha]

Personally, I'll take better songs with less technical proficiency over super technical songs that suck.  I knew decades ago they were amazing musicians.  To me, their songwriting has wavered as of late.

The problem is that Dream Theater are not the Beatles.

Yes, they have good songs, but in my opinion if they turn their focus on that... they are not that good. DT songs reduced to their most basic form are just plain average (with a few exceptions).

But they are master musicians and they can take their ideas to places were very few bands can. They can add very ambitious and intrincate musical passages, and take a lot of time to develop  that ideas because they have the kind of fans that like these things.

DT best part are in the arrangements. It´s what make them special, not the songwritting.

[ToT-147]

I love instrumentals. However, above everything else, the music needs to have an emotion. Many of my favorite moments in DT are Petrucci solos (BAI, LITS, TBOT etc,) or really big epic sections like the ending to TCOT or Octavarium.
Some of the complex sections are still very melodic. That's my favorite type of complexity, where it's still memorable. Some examples of great instrumental sections with lots of changes that are still musical include BF, BAI, Outcry, LTL, SDOIT and IT.
The stuff from DT I dislike are solos that are just runs with no feeling or emotion. Jordan is the most guilty of this. As much as I enjoy his playing, the leads he plays on his solo albums like Feeding The Wheel or Rhythm of Time are nearly all melodic while still being technical; however in DT the majority of his solos are more notes than music to me. Nearly all the solos from both JR and JP on TOT are like this. While that style of playing may require a ton of skill, it becomes boring and formulaic when there is no emotion.
So yes, technicality does matter, but what matters just as much (if not more) is the knowledge of when to use or not use that technicality in a song, and how to use it while still being melodic and emotional.

I'm in a bus and with an old crappy cellphone, so thank you for writing down my thoughts..      This is exactly how I feel about the whole issue, and yet, this:

If they weren´t that proficient on their instruments thay wouldn´t be able to play such intrincate musics.

I think is wrong... since it seems like the same but it is not.. And I think that's Kotowboy's main point, with which I agree.. Being technically good doesn't make you a good songwriter but, even more: it's not even something neccesary to achieve that.. You don't need to know any technics at all to be a good composer, meaning by this a guy who does music that's liked for some, starting for him/her.. So I'm not sure if I agree with JP that knowing more necessarily provides you more freedom to compose.. I'd say it even limitates your imagination for being distracting at the same time that being helpful.. I mean, with that kind of thinking, and having the ability to actually do it, you can think or feel -and I know for a fact this happens a lot- that you MUST at some point prove that you know what you apparently know.. And I'm far from saying JP is that kind of musician; in fact, that's one of the reasons why I think he's as good as he is.. Not just for what he does (extremely awesome songwriting: riffs, melodies, solos and what not) but for what he doesn't do: showing off more than a certain amount of time that in the end and being the technically great he is it's inevitable I suppose..

tl/dr: Mmmm, nope, I think you should read all what I wrote, otherwise you won't catch my opinion.. It's a very complex matter..

[CB]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/17972170_1537755296235715_4594363367007587874_o.jpg?oh=41365d57efa95500fced4997916f3579&oe=5982DA95


Totally agree with this

[erwinrafael]

Knowing technique does give you a lot more freedom to compose. Would Freddie Mercury be able to even imagine writing Bohemian Rhapsody if he does not think he can pull of convincingly the range of vocal styles needed in that song? Would he be able to write Somebody To Love if he doesn't think he can pull off an Aretha Franklin? Would Brian May even dare write a song with dixieland arrangement if he doesn't believe he has the chops to play the guitar and make it sound like a jazz band? Would Steve Vai be able to write Whispering A Prayer if he doesn't have the chops to make the guitar sound like a beautiful voice and if he can not pull off a convincing build up from simple beautiful melody to disciplined shredding in five minutes?

[ToT-147]

Knowing technique does give you a lot more freedom to compose. Would Freddie Mercury be able to even imagine writing Bohemian Rhapsody if he does not think he can pull of convincingly the range of vocal styles needed in that song? Would he be able to write Somebody To Love if he doesn't think he can pull off an Aretha Franklin? Would Brian May even dare write a song with dixieland arrangement if he doesn't believe he has the chops to play the guitar and make it sound like a jazz band? Would Steve Vai be able to write Whispering A Prayer if he doesn't have the chops to make the guitar sound like a beautiful voice and if he can not pull off a convincing build up from simple beautiful melody to disciplined shredding in five minutes?

No, they wouldn't be able.. But that wasn't my point.. What I was saying is that knowing technique doesn't make you instantly a better musician.. Of course it was more likely for Freddie to make that and plenty other songs because he studied and practiced a lot.. But he could imagine and actually create those pieces for his musical talent to compose; not magically for his technical knowledge..

And, besides, yeah, they did create all of that... but we'll never know what would've happened if they hadn't come to the technical knowledge they achieved.. Would they have made better songs?.. And this is the only possible answer it matters: probably.. I'm not saying musicians are better without that knowledge.. Only that, if you're a capable musician and you already have the talent and the imagination that makes you compose from good to excellent songs, you don't need to know any extra technique to improve yourself, altough, naturally, it may help..

[wrighty]

What is important for me in Dream Theater is the technical virtuosity of each member, and the songwriting, and the range of styles they produce.  I am a musician - being pretty good on both guitar and piano - so I perhaps appreciate the technical side more than if I weren't - but on its own, technique is not enough.  As an example, consider Michael Angelo Batio.  There's probably nobody more technically adept at pure shredding, but in my opinion he has an awful tone and such a mechanical playing style such that more than a couple of minutes of his playing is unlistenable.  Contrast that with JP's outro solo in 'Best of Times'.

Another example is Yngwie.  Great guitar player, not a bad songwriter, but his songs come nowhere near the level of complexity of DT's which means for me that they're not as interesting, since what you get is a 3 minute radio tune with a shredding solo using harmonic minor scales and diminished arpeggios.  I'm a huge Paul Gilbert fan, but even he's getting boring for me with each new album seemingly indistinguishable from the last.

So to answer the OP, DT's tech skill for me is hugely important, but mainly because it lends them the ability to keep writing interesting music, rather than appreciating the mechanical virtuosity for its own sake.

[t-bone2112]

To me, their technical ability is a huge part of what makes them great.  All the bands I truly love have very gifted musicians.  However that coupled with their songwriting is exactly why I love them so much.

Self indulgent, extended soloing as wankery?  Well, I understand that many find it boring, and I agree that it is sometimes unnecessary, but I can't think of a time I wished it wasn't there.

Of course, if you understand the bands I love and my favorite albums by them (Rush: Hemispheres, Jethro Tull: Thick As A Brick, Yes: Close to the Edge, Genesis: Foxtrot, DT: Scenes From a Memory), you'll understand that I love soloing, concept albums and lengthy songs.

Regarding SRV's "shredding".  Um, sorry, that isn't shredding.  That's the blues and every note he played was dripping with emotion.  EVH is one of the greatest guitarists of all time, but I don't like his solos: flash with little to no emotion.

YMMV