Some questions worth considering... (MP departure related)

[Perpetual Change]

I　know we've had a billion threads about this topic, but I　wanted to bring up something that, as far as I　know, has not been brought up yet. That something is Dream Theater's contractual obligation to Roadrunner.

First, my understanding is that bands are usually signed to work with labels for a certain number of albums. I'm guessing that's Dream Theater's case with Roadrunner. Does anyone know how many records Dream Theater have agreed to record with RR?

Secondly, if there IS a set number of albums Dream Theater are contractually required to produce, might this be a reason why the rest of the guys wanted to keep going, rather than wait for Mike? For example, say Dream Theater agreed to do--- oh, I don't know, let's say "5" albums--- with Roadrunner, not counting live stuff. That would mean at least 7 more years of Dream Theater's constant touring/recording before the guys can move to a new label or, under possibly more applicable circumstances, retire.

Let's assume that most of the members of Dream Theater want to stop doing music full-time within the next 10 years. Seems realistic, since Jordan will be in his 60s by then and the rest of the guys will be well into their 50's: passed the time most musicians really want to be on a full-time schedule.  It's seems to me that the hiatus Mike wanted would have interfered with that.

Couple of flaws with my suggestion: Most likely, RR doesn't give a shit about putting Dream Theater on the road. The guys, obviously, could make plenty of money for RR without touring. And as we know, DT's BC&SL tour just barely broke even.　Point here being that DT could have easily stopped working "full time" while fulfilling the assumed contractual obligation.

tl:dr version: Do you think DT let Mike go because they were worried his hiatus would delay their retirement plans? Some here have already pointed out that it would have financially affected everyone but Mike who is, most likely, rolling in cash right now given the size and status of the A7X tour/album. But what about contractually? Does anyone have an idea about that?

[hefdaddy42]

They had a 3-record deal with RR, from what I've seen Setlist Scotty say (I think).  That would make the next one the last on the current deal.

[Perpetual Change]

Huh. The fact that maybe *just maybe* the guys wanted to bang their last album with RR even more quickly is really though provoking. I'm sure even the guys in DT aren't sure what they'll do after the next album cycle, but who knows?　Of course, we're kinda beyond speculating now.

[lordxizor]

I don't buy the retirement thing. I'm pretty sure they can choose to call it a day and walk away whenever they want and are not obligated to record a certain number of albums with RR. They simply cannot record an album with another label until they fulfill their obligations to RR.

What I could see is that they see the momentum DT as a band has right now and with potentially only one more album with RR, they wanted to keep that momentum going so they can get a better deal with their next contract. Killing their momentum could hurt album sales when they came back from their potential hiatus, thus hurting their negotiating power.

[Dream Team]

Retirement isn't even an option, no way. Hasn't everyone noticed how excited JP is every time he talks about playing and writing music? It's definitely the same with James and Jordan.

[PlaysLikeMyung]

Their BCSL tour barely broke even because nobody wanted to see them on PN; they were waiting for a full album tour, which never came.

I saw them anyway, but my thought was that I'd much rather pay to see them have a longer set/one opening band/etc

[Perpetual Change]

Well, it goes without saying that PN09 would have been much more lucrative with PoS onboard...

[Moonchild]

Well, it goes without saying that PN09 would have been much more lucrative with PoS onboard...

Who?

[IdoSC]

Well, it goes without saying that PN09 would have been much more lucrative with PoS onboard...

Who?

Pain of Salvation...

And by the way, another tour like Octavarium, ToT or SDoIT will be damn attractive to any fan out there imo, but a similar set to the shows before the actual release of BCSL (Israel/Moscow for instance), with 1 opening act will work just as well.

[zerogravityfat]

once they have the new drummer they are auditioning for now, i'm sure they will bang out an album pretty fast. i doubt they are waiting for a drummer to write. they must have songs almost ready to record.

[KevShmev]

Well, it goes without saying that PN09 would have been much more lucrative with PoS onboard...

I don't think so.  Tickets had already been on sale for a while before the announcement came that PoS wasn't gonna be on the bill, so it is likely that the fans who would have paid to see them had already gotten their tickets.

And besides, they aren't that popular anyway, so they aren't a difference maker.

[Perpetual Change]

I wasn't talking about ticket sales at all, really. I was more just talking about people's general excitedness about the tour. I think PoS would have been a heck of a lot more exciting to more fans than, uh... holy shit I saw the band twice and I can't even remember their name.

I mean granted only a faction of DT fans know who PoS are, no one really knew who what's their names were either.

[KevShmev]

If you weren't talking about ticket sales, then why did you say the tour would have been more lucrative?

[bosk1]

The contract may have had something to do with it if they are thinking about jumping labels or there is some other incentive to fullfill their contract with Roadrunner, but I don't think so.  If I had to guess why they are itching to get back in the studio, my guess would be that a big factor is getting out on the road again.  I've mentioned this a few times, but I'll say it again.  Remember that BCSL was their highest debuting album of all time.  They had huge momentum at album release time.  And yet, for the entire tour cycle, they did not do a "DT tour" in support of it here in the U.S.--their home country.  Yes, they did PN.  But PN is PN.  It is seen as a "festival"-type tour, not a DT headlining album support tour.  That confuses me as a fan, and if I had to bet, I'd bet it may have irked some of the bandmembers.  At the very least, I'm sure some of them see it as a huge missed opportunity.  And let's face it, as a progressive metal band with members advancing in age, opportunities are not unlimited.  When an opportunity is there, you take advantage of it because it may not come around again.  And failing to capitalize on the momentum of the BCSL sales by doing a proper album support tour is, IMO, a missed opportunity.

As far as retiring being the motivation to fullfill the contract, I wouldn't bet on it.  I could be wrong, but my understanding is that the contract would not necessarily have much to do with that.  I think the way it works is, when you have a guarantee for a certain number of albums, that really only has teeth in terms of preventing the band from releasing an album on a different label while they're still under contract.  In terms of just not completing the contract, I think really all a label can do if a band retires or disbands, is ask really, really nicely that they finish out the contract.  I don't think they can do much more than that.

[Seventh Son]

I was always under the impression that if a band didn't fulfill their obligations to do x number of albums that they would be sued for breach of contract, unless something was arranged with the record company beforehand.

[Perpetual Change]

If you weren't talking about ticket sales, then why did you say the tour would have been more lucrative?

No lie, as I was writing my original post I actually though to myself "lucrative really just means financially appealing..." but decided to post it anyway. I meant lucrative for the fans, like, "the fans were getting more bang for their buck" kinda thing. But poor wording on my part. It's late here, dammit.

In terms of just not completing the contract, I think really all a label can do if a band retires or disbands, is ask really, really nicely that they finish out the contract.  I don't think they can do much more than that.

Yeah, I had thought about that too. Bands break up all the time without fulfilling contracts. I do still wonder where DVDs count toward that, though. Does CiM count as one of DT's releases? Maybe, if it does, the band could be shopping around again. Maybe, in that case, Mike wanted to take a break before making any more big commitments.

I love speculatin'  

Oh and I agree about the tour.  It's a shame, too. Sure, they would have had to play smaller venues, but I would have loved to get the chance to see DT in some of those Scenes-tour sized venues. And that leads my mind to yet another avenue...

OFF TOPIC

...perhaps the reason DT audiences tend to be very, uh, docile is because of the venues they're playing. When a bands in a smaller place, everyone's is packed together and you've got know choice but to be into it. When you're in a concert hall with 7,000 seats for a festival and only 3,500 of them are full... things can be a lot more awkward. Especially for all the people in the back looking at all the empty, slightly more expensive seats toward the front.

[bosk1]

I was always under the impression that if a band didn't fulfill their obligations to do x number of albums that they would be sued for breach of contract, unless something was arranged with the record company beforehand.

It happened to a number of bands in the '80s, but I don't think that's done as much anymore.  I think the labels wised up to the fact that if  band broke up, there was no point in suing because they weren't likely to recover anything from the lawsuit.  Of course there are exceptions, but I think the way it usually plays out is something like:
-Band breaks up
-Label says, "not so fast.  You owe us another album."
-Band says, "yeah, well, we're not a band anymore, so whatever."
-Label says, "but...but...BREACH OF CONTRACT!"
-Band says, "yeah, well, we're not a band anymore, so sue me."
-Label's lawyers say, "but...but...BREACH OF CONTRACT!"
-Band says, "yeah, well, we're not a band aymore, so give it your best shot.  It'd be cheaper suing a rock because you'll ultimately recover the same amount at the end (zero), and you'll spend less in legal fees because the rock isn't likely to put up much of a fight."
-Label's lawyers write a few more nasty letters.
-Band responds along the lines of, "yeah, well, we're not a and anymore, so..."
-Label says "BUT...!  BUT...!  please?"
-Band:  "no."
-Label:  
-Band:  

[Moonchild]

I wasn't talking about ticket sales at all, really. I was more just talking about people's general excitedness about the tour. I think PoS would have been a heck of a lot more exciting to more fans than, uh... holy shit I saw the band twice and I can't even remember their name.

I mean granted only a faction of DT fans know who PoS are, no one really knew who what's their names were either.

When you say faction of DT you mean a reallllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllly small faction.
Opeth was a great band to open for DT from what I've experienced. I can only think of Marillion or Supertramp or Rush to open some excitement more to PN. Hell I would cream if Steve Hackett came and he is more famous than PoS.

[Perpetual Change]

Not that small. PoS have toured with DT before. Mike has worked with Gildenlow on a number of occasions. I'd say most serious Dream Theater fans at least know who Pain of Salvation are. Sure, not all of 'em like PoS, but I'm sure most have at least heard of them. More DT fans would be into PoS than the last tours BtBaM or Three, that's for sure. And since PoS would have occupied the third slot (where BtBaM was), that already makes it a better show than PN08.

Furthermore, DT fans who didn't know who PoS were would probably come away liking them and wanting to hear more. I'd warrant most DT fans who didn't know Opeth or Br00tal and Boring Average Metal came away from those shows completely baffled as to why DT would choose such harsh music to open for them to begin with.

PoS would have just made PN09 better. That's all.

And I remember now. Big Elf. Did ANYONE know who they were? Does anyone (aside from Nick) still care?  

[Pierced Brosnan]

I wouldn't be suprised if DT renew their contract with RR anyway, at all. They've never recieved more promotion and the band's material isn't interfered with, as well as RR being a huge, huge label, what more could they want?

[robwebster]

And I remember now. Big Elf. Did ANYONE know who they were? Does anyone (aside from Nick) still care? 

Oh, definitely! I didn't know who they were but I'm glad I do now. Fantastic band.

They split opinion I guess by being fairly transparent in their influences, but to me it's like if David Bowie, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd and Deep Purple - all at the peaks of their careers - were to join forces, to create the least probable supergroup ever. Everything that's brilliant about the seventies, distilled, and injected into some top-notch songs. A-side stuff. Really like them.

Even though their name is completely atrocious, and just brings to mind Will Ferrell.

[Perpetual Change]

I like Black Sabbath and Deep Purple, but am mostly apathetic about Floyd and Bowie. I'll give BE the credit for putting on a good show, but I have absolutely no desire to listen to their studio recordings.

[MykeHavoc]

Well, usually a label will put together some sort of compilation of live/remixed/unreleased material without the band's consent as a way to fulfill their label obligation.

And I'm not sure we're totally aware of what DT's current status is, because If I'm not mistaken, Chaos in Motion may very have counted towards their contractual required releases.

[TAC]

I believe, as stated, that this will be there final album of the contract.

What I could see is that they see the momentum DT as a band has right now and with potentially only one more album with RR, they wanted to keep that momentum going so they can get a better deal with their next contract. Killing their momentum could hurt album sales when they came back from their potential hiatus, thus hurting their negotiating power.

Absolutely.
Unless the band was going to totally implode, this would be the WORST time to take a break. They just got the opening slot they've waited their whole career for. Plus the A7X eyes are now on them.

[bosk1]

And I'm not sure we're totally aware of what DT's current status is, because If I'm not mistaken, Chaos in Motion may very have counted towards their contractual required releases.

Of course, it depends on what the contract says.  But live albums typically do not count.  I don't know why.  But that's just the way it isually is.

[lithium112]

Not that small. PoS have toured with DT before. Mike has worked with Gildenlow on a number of occasions. I'd say most serious Dream Theater fans at least know who Pain of Salvation are. Sure, not all of 'em like PoS, but I'm sure most have at least heard of them. More DT fans would be into PoS than the last tours BtBaM or Three, that's for sure. And since PoS would have occupied the third slot (where BtBaM was), that already makes it a better show than PN08.

Furthermore, DT fans who didn't know who PoS were would probably come away liking them and wanting to hear more. I'd warrant most DT fans who didn't know Opeth or Br00tal and Boring Average Metal came away from those shows completely baffled as to why DT would choose such harsh music to open for them to begin with.

PoS would have just made PN09 better. That's all.

And I remember now. Big Elf. Did ANYONE know who they were? Does anyone (aside from Nick) still care?  

The point of PN wasn't for people to see "DT and opening acts". It was to showcase the talents of amazing progressive musicians. Yeah, Opeth and BTBAM are a lot heavier than DT in many aspects, but you would get more of out the show if you opened yourself up musically and tried to appreciate what they bring to the table rather than dismissing them as being too "harsh". Sure you might think that PoS is more popular, but on every forum I've been to BTBAM gets a lot more recognition than them. So instead of calling it "boring average metal" why don't you give it a chance?

Oh, and yeah, I knew who BigElf were, but that's beside the point. 

[ariich]

I was always under the impression that if a band didn't fulfill their obligations to do x number of albums that they would be sued for breach of contract, unless something was arranged with the record company beforehand.

It happened to a number of bands in the '80s, but I don't think that's done as much anymore.  I think the labels wised up to the fact that if  band broke up, there was no point in suing because they weren't likely to recover anything from the lawsuit.  Of course there are exceptions, but I think the way it usually plays out is something like:
-Band breaks up
-Label says, "not so fast.  You owe us another album."
-Band says, "yeah, well, we're not a band anymore, so whatever."
-Label says, "but...but...BREACH OF CONTRACT!"
-Band says, "yeah, well, we're not a band anymore, so sue me."
-Label's lawyers say, "but...but...BREACH OF CONTRACT!"
-Band says, "yeah, well, we're not a band aymore, so give it your best shot.  It'd be cheaper suing a rock because you'll ultimately recover the same amount at the end (zero), and you'll spend less in legal fees because the rock isn't likely to put up much of a fight."
-Label's lawyers write a few more nasty letters.
-Band responds along the lines of, "yeah, well, we're not a and anymore, so..."
-Label says "BUT...!  BUT...!  please?"
-Band:  "no."
-Label: 
-Band: 

This is both highly amusing and also a good point.

[El Barto]

Their BCSL tour barely broke even because nobody wanted to see them on PN; they were waiting for a full album tour, which never came.

Damn Skippy!

And I believe what bands often do when they're contractually obligated to release an album is to release outtakes and throwaways.  I'd be willing to bet that they left 10 songs on the floor from the last three albums.  Give them 9 Raise the Knife type songs, and one Cocksucker Blues, then call it a day. 

[bosk1]

Their BCSL tour barely broke even because nobody wanted to see them on PN; they were waiting for a full album tour, which never came.

Damn Skippy!

And I believe what bands often do when they're contractually obligated to release an album is to release outtakes and throwaways.  I'd be willing to bet that they left 10 songs on the floor from the last three albums.  Give them 9 Raise the Knife type songs, and one Canadian Rap II, then call it a day. 

FTFY

[Perpetual Change]

The point of PN wasn't for people to see "DT and opening acts". It was to showcase the talents of amazing progressive musicians. Yeah, Opeth and BTBAM are a lot heavier than DT in many aspects, but you would get more of out the show if you opened yourself up musically and tried to appreciate what they bring to the table rather than dismissing them as being too "harsh". Sure you might think that PoS is more popular, but on every forum I've been to BTBAM gets a lot more recognition than them. So instead of calling it "boring average metal" why don't you give it a chance?

I　have three of their albums (Alaska, Colors, and TGM). I actually kind of like them. But I also kind of think they suck.

[Setlist Scotty]

And I'm not sure we're totally aware of what DT's current status is, because If I'm not mistaken, Chaos in Motion may very have counted towards their contractual required releases.

Of course, it depends on what the contract says.  But live albums typically do not count.  I don't know why.  But that's just the way it isually is.

What Bosk said. And I know in the case of DT, they didn't count towards their contract with Warner Bros (Atco/EastWest/Elektra/Atlantic) and I'm almost positive it doesn't count towards the contract with RR, otherwise we would have heard about them shopping around for a new label, much as we did in 2007.

[Perpetual Change]

I'd *guess* that maybe labels see live albums as a form of promotion. They're great for the fans, but they can be expensive the shoot and don't sell as well as studio albums. It seems like with CiM RR just wanted to take Mike's soundboard boots and release an official bootleg quality product as if it were on the level of DT's last two live packages.

[ReaPsTA]

And I'm not sure we're totally aware of what DT's current status is, because If I'm not mistaken, Chaos in Motion may very have counted towards their contractual required releases.

Of course, it depends on what the contract says.  But live albums typically do not count.  I don't know why.  But that's just the way it isually is.

What Bosk said. And I know in the case of DT, they didn't count towards their contract with Warner Bros (Atco/EastWest/Elektra/Atlantic) and I'm almost positive it doesn't count towards the contract with RR, otherwise we would have heard about them shopping around for a new label, much as we did in 2007.

Why would they shop around for new labels?  What aspect of their RR contract isn't working out for them?

[Perpetual Change]

Why would they shop around for new labels?  What aspect of their RR contract isn't working out for them?

Well, I'd put it beyond most the guys of Dream Theater to bitch about their label, especially as their popularity is rising and especially because they've never done so in the past. Sure, Mike has, but even that was always 'after the fact' of moving to a new label. I never expected them to leave Warner Bros, anyway.

But problems with Roadrunner? You're right... I can't think of many. But cutting them down to one world tour was, as I understand it, a suggestion that came from RR, and really a big disappointment to a lot of fans.

[Setlist Scotty]

Why would they shop around for new labels?  What aspect of their RR contract isn't working out for them?

Well, I'd put it beyond most the guys of Dream Theater to bitch about their label, especially as their popularity is rising and especially because they've never done so in the past. Sure, Mike has, but even that was always 'after the fact' of moving to a new label. I never expected them to leave Warner Bros, anyway.

But problems with Roadrunner? You're right... I can't think of many. But cutting them down to one world tour was, as I understand it, a suggestion that came from RR, and really a big disappointment to a lot of fans.

Where did you hear that it was RR that told them to cut back on touring? Doesn't make sense that they would. Besides, DT funds their own tours (neither labels nor promoters fund the tours).

As for why DT would consider shopping around? Yeah, they're probably very happy with how RR has handled things, but I'm sure that there's a few things they'd probably like to change (I'm speculating) and if nothing else, I'd bet they'd shop around to see what kind of money other labels would offer them. Then they'd go back to RR and say "well this label is offering us <insert money, perks, whatever> so now make a counter-offer".