Comparing songs from ADTOE with their I&W counterparts

[Orthogonal]

We all agree that repeat usage of song structures is a common thing for every band, DT included. The difference here is that the vast majority of the ADTOE structural similarities are patterned after songs from a single album instead of being littered throughout the DT back catalog which is why there is increased discussion about it.  No one yet knows if it was intentional or not, but this is seems too coincidental to be an aberration. It's just something fun to talk about.

I raise you Octavarium. Hysteria = Panic Attack. Stockholm Syndrome = Never Enough. Both from Absolution by Muse.

Comments like this continue to demonstrate the HUGE disconnect people are having with what is being discussed. Yes, Panic Attack and Never Enough are very similar stylistically to Hysteria and Stockhome Syndrome. Even the main riffs are extremely reminiscent of their counterparts. This is very well known and everyone agrees that DT was heavily influenced by Muse on those songs. They are however very different structurally. Seriously, I just tried to tab it out and Hysteria and Panic attack start to break down around the first chorus and then completely diverge afterwards. People seem to continue to conflate song structure with style and riffs for some reason.

Look at it this way. When we are comparing Outcry with Metropolis as structurally similar songs, what we are saying is they are like 2 houses with the same floor plans. Both houses may be very different from there out. One has carpet, the other hardwood floor. One is painted brown, the other white. One has leather furniture, the other is upholstered. They look very different, but have the same structure.

The comparison of Hysteria with Panic Attack is like 2 houses where one is a single story 2 bedroom house, and the other is a 2 story 4 bedroom house, but they are both painted brown, both have carpet and leather furniture.

I hope this analogy makes the point we are trying to make.

[BlobVanDam]

Over halfway through "Lost Not Forgotten" and even looking for hints of "Under A Glass Moon" I'm at a complete loss. Did people just pick two random songs off each album to find nonexistent similarities? Are some of the techniques in the guitar solo what they're talking about?

Everybody heard the same few similarities, but then some people decided it meant they should try to fit the square peg into the round hole at all costs. And when the square peg doesn't fit, they try to argue that squares are a special case of circle that has corners.

[erciccio]

Over halfway through "Lost Not Forgotten" and even looking for hints of "Under A Glass Moon" I'm at a complete loss. Did people just pick two random songs off each album to find nonexistent similarities? Are some of the techniques in the guitar solo what they're talking about?

Everybody heard the same few similarities, but then some people decided it meant they should try to fit the square peg into the round hole at all costs. And when the square peg doesn't fit, they try to argue that squares are a special case of circle that has corners.

THAT!   

Orcus, if you ignore the horses ( ), the piano intro, the piano arpeggios w/ riff, the tickle section, the verse in 4/4 vs 6/4, the longer instrumental section in LNF, the "samba" solo section and other minor differences...YES, they are very similar!!!

[duncan3dc]

*snip
On The Backs Of Angels has no more in common with Pull Me Under then it does with As I Am, New Millennium or any other number of ~8 min DT metal songs that have a lengthy build up.
*snip*

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and started to look at the structure to As I Am:

clean riff - played by bass only
distorted guitar and drums building
kicks into a full band version of the first riff
then a palm muted riff
verse, similar to the palm muted riff
bridge 1 "taking in the view..."
bridge 2 "i've been trying to justify..."
chorus
full band version of the first riff
verse
bridge 1

I only got to here as I realised that they are so far different by this point that it's not worth continuing. Pull Me Under and On the Backs of Angels both do 2 verses before they get to the 1st chorus, and they never touch on a verse again. As I Am does verse-bridge-chorus-verse-bridge-chorus.

I'll admit that the structures match up until the first bridges, but after that they diverge completely.
However I matched up every section between Pull Me Under and On the Backs of Angels.

If we were talking about that kind of match up (As I Am <-> Pull Me Under) then I could understand people saying it's a reach, but in my eyes Pull Me Under and On the Backs of Angels share the same structure.
I'd love to have another example pointed out that I can see for myself. If I could find another track from their discography that was structurally the same as On the Backs of Angels, maybe I could start to see this as some coincidence. But right now it seems far too extreme to be accidental.

Some artists constantly release disc after disc of songs with the same "intro/choru/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus/outro" structure, and people don't even take that into account when judging whether they like the songs or not.

John Petrucci releases two songs with the same slightly more complicated song structure, and for some fans the world ends.

Again, to clarify, I think this is awesome. The world is not ending. And I'll be kinda disappointed if Petrucci or Rudess reveal they didn't do this on purpose.
I think it's only Maria taking issue with it, and potentially Portnoy

[Metabog]

Look at it this way. When we are comparing Outcry with Metropolis as structurally similar songs, what we are saying is they are like 2 houses with the same floor plans. Both houses may be very different from there out. One has carpet, the other hardwood floor. One is painted brown, the other white. One has leather furniture, the other is upholstered. They look very different, but have the same structure.

I believe we refer to that as inheritance and polymorphism. 

[duncan3dc]

Over halfway through "Lost Not Forgotten" and even looking for hints of "Under A Glass Moon" I'm at a complete loss. Did people just pick two random songs off each album to find nonexistent similarities? Are some of the techniques in the guitar solo what they're talking about?

It's nothing to do with how the solos sound, or are played, or how they feel, but that the solo is where it is.

Out of roughly 30 sections I found in each song. Lost Not Forgotten has 3 sections that I couldn't find a counterpart for, and Under a Glass Moon only has that bass fill before the guitar solo that I didn't see as having a match in Lost Not Forgotten.

I consider this much more than "vague similarities" as others have called them. Maybe that's just me.
I'm not saying this is categorically done on purpose, but it just seems too coincidental to have been an accident.

I do hope Petrucci or Rudess will come out and clarify whether this was accidental or not.
I don't really consider LaBrie's comment to be definitive, but maybe that's cos I don't want to accept it yet 

[Perpetual Change]

I'm right, you're wrong, the end. 

That's not the way things work around here. It's a discussion forum.  I don't care what your opinions are or what their validity may be.  This kind of behavior isn't necessary. Keep it up, and your exit will be as swift as your entrance.

You're right and I apologize. I made my point fine without that little nugget at the end.  Too far.  Won't happen again.

If you say so. Who, exactly, have you convinced?

[ZKX-2099]

Patterns in the ivy, people...

[orcus116]

Over halfway through "Lost Not Forgotten" and even looking for hints of "Under A Glass Moon" I'm at a complete loss. Did people just pick two random songs off each album to find nonexistent similarities? Are some of the techniques in the guitar solo what they're talking about?

Everybody heard the same few similarities, but then some people decided it meant they should try to fit the square peg into the round hole at all costs. And when the square peg doesn't fit, they try to argue that squares are a special case of circle that has corners.

That's what it seems like.

[?]

Ok, some of those similarities are notable, but I think the BMUBMD/Surrounded and BITS/TTT comprarisons are REALLY far-fetched and the TITL/AD and Outcry/Metropolis similarities are only slight. Most pop songs are written with a similar structure so I'm not concerned about it. Endless Sacrifice, Sacrificed Sons and The Ministry of Lost Souls also have a bit similar structures to each other (starts like a ballad, gets powerful in the chorus and then goes into a technical interlude after which the song returns to where it was before the soloing), and The Glass Prison, As I Am and A Nightmare to Remember have a similar build-up until the vocals come in.

[Dream Team]

I think MarlaHooch is missing the obvious point that the old I&W charts are buried somewhere in MP's basement and there's no way the other guys would have access to them. 

[reo73]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
The RIFF label is to notate what the guitar is playing, and I don't label the parts by Verse or Chorus, etc.

- INTRO 1A: Keys with Embellishments Underneath
- INTRO 1B: Dramatic Guitar Riff with Full Band
- TRANSITION: Intro Riff Rests
- RIFF 1A: Heavy Guitar Riff
- RIFF 1A: Same Heavy Riff Keys Enter Over Top
- RIFF 1B: New Heavy Guitar Riff With Supporting Keys
- RIFF 1B (Vocals): Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C (Vocals): Guitar Riff Changes
- TRANSITION:  Riff 1C Ends
- MELLOWER SECTION (Vocals):  Music has a more mellow feel
- RIFF 2 (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff Enters, Vocal Melody Changes
- RIFF 1A REPRISE
- RIFF 1A REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C REPRISE (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff changes, Vocal Melody Changes
- TRANSITION:  Heavy Riff winds down, Vocal Section Ends
- PROGGY INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Includes Guitar Scale Runs, Chromatic Unisons, Bass Solo, Etc.
- OUTRO OF INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Guitar Riffing build-up into a Unison
- MELLOWER SECTION:  Instrumentation takes on a Mellower Feel 
- MELLOWER SECTION  (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 2 REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocal Melody Similar as to Riff 2 Earlier In song
- RIFF 2B (Vocals):  New Guitar Riff/Progression and Build Up to Ending
- ENDING CHORD:  Full Band out on final Chord.  Notes held and sustains.

[erciccio]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
The RIFF label is to notate what the guitar is playing, and I don't label the parts by Verse or Chorus, etc.

- INTRO 1A: Keys with Embellishments Underneath
- INTRO 1B: Dramatic Guitar Riff with Full Band
- TRANSITION: Intro Riff Rests
- RIFF 1A: Heavy Guitar Riff
- RIFF 1A: Same Heavy Riff Keys Enter Over Top
- RIFF 1B: New Heavy Guitar Riff With Supporting Keys
- RIFF 1B (Vocals): Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C (Vocals): Guitar Riff Changes
- TRANSITION:  Riff 1C Ends
- MELLOWER SECTION (Vocals):  Music has a more mellow feel
- RIFF 2 (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff Enters, Vocal Melody Changes
- RIFF 1A REPRISE
- RIFF 1A REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C REPRISE (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff changes, Vocal Melody Changes
- TRANSITION:  Heavy Riff winds down, Vocal Section Ends
- PROGGY INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Includes Guitar Scale Runs, Chromatic Unisons, Bass Solo, Etc.
- OUTRO OF INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Guitar Riffing build-up into a Unison
- MELLOWER SECTION:  Instrumentation takes on a Mellower Feel 
- MELLOWER SECTION  (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 2 REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocal Melody Similar as to Riff 2 Earlier In song
- RIFF 2B (Vocals):  New Guitar Riff/Progression and Build Up to Ending
- ENDING CHORD:  Full Band out on final Chord.  Notes held and sustains.

Honestly, it's starting to look like a round square.
With a few additional hammer blows it might be anything from Laura Pausini to Sepultura.

[duncan3dc]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
*snip*

Honestly, it's starting to look like a round square.
With a few additional hammer blows it might be anything from Laura Pausini to Sepultura.

Why don't you tell us which other DT song it could be, that would actually be a useful point.

[Metabog]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
The RIFF label is to notate what the guitar is playing, and I don't label the parts by Verse or Chorus, etc.

- INTRO 1A: Keys with Embellishments Underneath
- INTRO 1B: Dramatic Guitar Riff with Full Band
- TRANSITION: Intro Riff Rests
- RIFF 1A: Heavy Guitar Riff
- RIFF 1A: Same Heavy Riff Keys Enter Over Top
- RIFF 1B: New Heavy Guitar Riff With Supporting Keys
- RIFF 1B (Vocals): Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C (Vocals): Guitar Riff Changes
- TRANSITION:  Riff 1C Ends
- MELLOWER SECTION (Vocals):  Music has a more mellow feel
- RIFF 2 (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff Enters, Vocal Melody Changes
- RIFF 1A REPRISE
- RIFF 1A REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C REPRISE (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff changes, Vocal Melody Changes
- TRANSITION:  Heavy Riff winds down, Vocal Section Ends
- PROGGY INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Includes Guitar Scale Runs, Chromatic Unisons, Bass Solo, Etc.
- OUTRO OF INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Guitar Riffing build-up into a Unison
- MELLOWER SECTION:  Instrumentation takes on a Mellower Feel 
- MELLOWER SECTION  (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 2 REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocal Melody Similar as to Riff 2 Earlier In song
- RIFF 2B (Vocals):  New Guitar Riff/Progression and Build Up to Ending
- ENDING CHORD:  Full Band out on final Chord.  Notes held and sustains.

Honestly, it's starting to look like a round square.
With a few additional hammer blows it might be anything from Laura Pausini to Sepultura.

You might as well just call all those bits "metal music plays here".

[duncan3dc]

You might as well just call all those bits "metal music plays here".

...that was a joke right?

[Bertielee]

I just can't believe this thread was revived. Geez!

B.Lee

[erciccio]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
*snip*

Honestly, it's starting to look like a round square.
With a few additional hammer blows it might be anything from Laura Pausini to Sepultura.

Why don't you tell us which other DT song it could be, that would actually be a useful point.

Not Outrcy, for sure.
For me it would be
1) Intro- only keys to create atmosphere
2) Electronic percussions enters in background
3) Piano melody enters, doubled by percussions.

Not Metropolis, for sure. It would be
1) Percussions + keys + effects.
2) Guitars and drums enter.

Oh yeah, if you hammer well they are the same.

Metallica would say.....SO WHAT?? (heavy guitar riff enters) 

[BlobVanDam]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
The RIFF label is to notate what the guitar is playing, and I don't label the parts by Verse or Chorus, etc.

- INTRO 1A: Keys with Embellishments Underneath
- INTRO 1B: Dramatic Guitar Riff with Full Band
- TRANSITION: Intro Riff Rests
- RIFF 1A: Heavy Guitar Riff
- RIFF 1A: Same Heavy Riff Keys Enter Over Top
- RIFF 1B: New Heavy Guitar Riff With Supporting Keys
- RIFF 1B (Vocals): Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C (Vocals): Guitar Riff Changes
- TRANSITION:  Riff 1C Ends
- MELLOWER SECTION (Vocals):  Music has a more mellow feel
- RIFF 2 (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff Enters, Vocal Melody Changes
- RIFF 1A REPRISE
- RIFF 1A REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C REPRISE (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff changes, Vocal Melody Changes
- TRANSITION:  Heavy Riff winds down, Vocal Section Ends
- PROGGY INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Includes Guitar Scale Runs, Chromatic Unisons, Bass Solo, Etc.
- OUTRO OF INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Guitar Riffing build-up into a Unison
- MELLOWER SECTION:  Instrumentation takes on a Mellower Feel 
- MELLOWER SECTION  (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 2 REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocal Melody Similar as to Riff 2 Earlier In song
- RIFF 2B (Vocals):  New Guitar Riff/Progression and Build Up to Ending
- ENDING CHORD:  Full Band out on final Chord.  Notes held and sustains.

You neglected to mention that "Keys with embellishment" is the main keyboard riff in Metropolis before being repeated over the "dramatic guitar riff", but in Outcry, it is not. It starts with a single note melody, then plays a full string arrangement over the guitar riff.

In Metropolis, the mellower section leads to a heavier half of that verse, with a very similar vocal melody, since it's still the same section. In Outcry it leads to a chorus with an entirely different melody.

This "transition" to the instrumental section is a complete turnaround of tempo to an entirely different feel in Metropolis. In Outcry it is a seamless transition.

And the "proggy instrumental section" you have so conveniently left out of your analysis is exactly 4 minutes of the song Outcry. That's over 1/3 of the song you have omitted because it in no way fits your wishful thinking. So right there your analysis is 35% garbage, and you know that, which is why you left it out of your vague "chart". There is zero similarity in structure of the instrumental section, which is a huge part of both songs. Even taking your analysis down to basically a single instrument, and ignoring 1/3 of the song, your comparison holds no water.

Maybe you'd like to take another crack and simplify your chart even further until it works. Let me save you some work by taking it to the point where it actually fits-

1. song starts.
2. song has some stuff.
3. song finishes.

I'd continue with the rest of the song, but that's more than enough for anyone to realize that this is still fitting square pegs into round holes.

[erciccio]

Maybe you'd like to take another crack and simplify your chart even further until it works. Let me save you some work by taking it to the point where it actually fits-

1. song starts.
2. song has some stuff.
3. song finishes.

Wow!! Cool chart!!!
Now I can also see the similarities between Take The Time and Bridges!!! 

[reo73]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
The RIFF label is to notate what the guitar is playing, and I don't label the parts by Verse or Chorus, etc.

- INTRO 1A: Keys with Embellishments Underneath
- INTRO 1B: Dramatic Guitar Riff with Full Band
- TRANSITION: Intro Riff Rests
- RIFF 1A: Heavy Guitar Riff
- RIFF 1A: Same Heavy Riff Keys Enter Over Top
- RIFF 1B: New Heavy Guitar Riff With Supporting Keys
- RIFF 1B (Vocals): Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C (Vocals): Guitar Riff Changes
- TRANSITION:  Riff 1C Ends
- MELLOWER SECTION (Vocals):  Music has a more mellow feel
- RIFF 2 (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff Enters, Vocal Melody Changes
- RIFF 1A REPRISE
- RIFF 1A REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C REPRISE (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff changes, Vocal Melody Changes
- TRANSITION:  Heavy Riff winds down, Vocal Section Ends
- PROGGY INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Includes Guitar Scale Runs, Chromatic Unisons, Bass Solo, Etc.
- OUTRO OF INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Guitar Riffing build-up into a Unison
- MELLOWER SECTION:  Instrumentation takes on a Mellower Feel 
- MELLOWER SECTION  (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 2 REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocal Melody Similar as to Riff 2 Earlier In song
- RIFF 2B (Vocals):  New Guitar Riff/Progression and Build Up to Ending
- ENDING CHORD:  Full Band out on final Chord.  Notes held and sustains.

You neglected to mention that "Keys with embellishment" is the main keyboard riff in Metropolis before being repeated over the "dramatic guitar riff", but in Outcry, it is not. It starts with a single note melody, then plays a full string arrangement over the guitar riff.

In Metropolis, the mellower section leads to a heavier half of that verse, with a very similar vocal melody, since it's still the same section. In Outcry it leads to a chorus with an entirely different melody.

This "transition" to the instrumental section is a complete turnaround of tempo to an entirely different feel in Metropolis. In Outcry it is a seamless transition.

And the "proggy instrumental section" you have so conveniently left out of your analysis is exactly 4 minutes of the song Outcry. That's over 1/3 of the song you have omitted because it in no way fits your wishful thinking. So right there your analysis is 35% garbage, and you know that, which is why you left it out of your vague "chart". There is zero similarity in structure of the instrumental section, which is a huge part of both songs. Even taking your analysis down to basically a single instrument, and ignoring 1/3 of the song, your comparison holds no water.

Maybe you'd like to take another crack and simplify your chart even further until it works. Let me save you some work by taking it to the point where it actually fits-

1. song starts.
2. song has some stuff.
3. song finishes.

I'd continue with the rest of the song, but that's more than enough for anyone to realize that this is still fitting square pegs into round holes.

You didn't answer my question...which one is it?

[erciccio]

Which song is this...Outcry or Metropolis? 
The RIFF label is to notate what the guitar is playing, and I don't label the parts by Verse or Chorus, etc.

- INTRO 1A: Keys with Embellishments Underneath
- INTRO 1B: Dramatic Guitar Riff with Full Band
- TRANSITION: Intro Riff Rests
- RIFF 1A: Heavy Guitar Riff
- RIFF 1A: Same Heavy Riff Keys Enter Over Top
- RIFF 1B: New Heavy Guitar Riff With Supporting Keys
- RIFF 1B (Vocals): Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C (Vocals): Guitar Riff Changes
- TRANSITION:  Riff 1C Ends
- MELLOWER SECTION (Vocals):  Music has a more mellow feel
- RIFF 2 (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff Enters, Vocal Melody Changes
- RIFF 1A REPRISE
- RIFF 1A REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 1C REPRISE (Vocals):  Heavy Guitar Riff changes, Vocal Melody Changes
- TRANSITION:  Heavy Riff winds down, Vocal Section Ends
- PROGGY INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Includes Guitar Scale Runs, Chromatic Unisons, Bass Solo, Etc.
- OUTRO OF INSTRUMENTAL SECTION:  Guitar Riffing build-up into a Unison
- MELLOWER SECTION:  Instrumentation takes on a Mellower Feel 
- MELLOWER SECTION  (Vocals):  Vocals enter
- RIFF 2 REPRISE (Vocals):  Vocal Melody Similar as to Riff 2 Earlier In song
- RIFF 2B (Vocals):  New Guitar Riff/Progression and Build Up to Ending
- ENDING CHORD:  Full Band out on final Chord.  Notes held and sustains.

You neglected to mention that "Keys with embellishment" is the main keyboard riff in Metropolis before being repeated over the "dramatic guitar riff", but in Outcry, it is not. It starts with a single note melody, then plays a full string arrangement over the guitar riff.

In Metropolis, the mellower section leads to a heavier half of that verse, with a very similar vocal melody, since it's still the same section. In Outcry it leads to a chorus with an entirely different melody.

This "transition" to the instrumental section is a complete turnaround of tempo to an entirely different feel in Metropolis. In Outcry it is a seamless transition.

And the "proggy instrumental section" you have so conveniently left out of your analysis is exactly 4 minutes of the song Outcry. That's over 1/3 of the song you have omitted because it in no way fits your wishful thinking. So right there your analysis is 35% garbage, and you know that, which is why you left it out of your vague "chart". There is zero similarity in structure of the instrumental section, which is a huge part of both songs. Even taking your analysis down to basically a single instrument, and ignoring 1/3 of the song, your comparison holds no water.

Maybe you'd like to take another crack and simplify your chart even further until it works. Let me save you some work by taking it to the point where it actually fits-

1. song starts.
2. song has some stuff.
3. song finishes.

I'd continue with the rest of the song, but that's more than enough for anyone to realize that this is still fitting square pegs into round holes.

You didn't answer my question...which one is it?

The Answer Lies Within

[BlobVanDam]

As I said, it doesn't fit either one properly. You've taken liberties with your chart to fit halfway between them, but for either song it's wrong. So the answer is "neither".

[chrisbDTM]

[reo73]

As I said, it doesn't fit either one properly. You've taken liberties with your chart to fit halfway between them, but for either song it's wrong. So the answer is "neither".

That's fine, Neither is a valid choice.  But it's curious that you say it fits halfway between the two.  Are you saying that as written it fits both or neither?  Not sure what you mean by halfway?

[BlobVanDam]

As I said, it doesn't fit either one properly. You've taken liberties with your chart to fit halfway between them, but for either song it's wrong. So the answer is "neither".

That's fine, Neither is a valid choice.  But it's curious that you say it fits halfway between the two.  Are you saying that as written it fits both or neither?  Not sure what you mean by halfway?

I mean there are parts that fit Metropolis but not Outcry, and sections that fit Outcry but not Metropolis. It's a bit of both, but neither.

[Metabog]

Let's solve this scientifically:

Draw graphs for each song representing musical "intensity" over time. See if there are similar features at similar times in both songs. Rather than spending the afternoon in Matlab, get a piece of paper and a pen and subjectively draw how driving/heavy/soft/hard/ each sample of the graph is. I don't care enough to do it, but you guys clearly do.

[reo73]

As I said, it doesn't fit either one properly. You've taken liberties with your chart to fit halfway between them, but for either song it's wrong. So the answer is "neither".

That's fine, Neither is a valid choice.  But it's curious that you say it fits halfway between the two.  Are you saying that as written it fits both or neither?  Not sure what you mean by halfway?

I mean there are parts that fit Metropolis but not Outcry, and sections that fit Outcry but not Metropolis. It's a bit of both, but neither.

So "as written" it is not completely true to either song?  I'm curious which parts don't fit?

[hefdaddy42]

Who listens to music this way?

[reo73]

Who listens to music this way?

Musicians who like to dissect compositions and DT is great fodder for dissection.

Here is a post someone at the MP forum made that is quite good...

I think it is important to note that there are people who have jobs at universities all over the world who teach people at an undergrad level to analyze music in this manner before they reach their Junior year of college. My point is, I LOVE this album. I haven't felt this way about any album in years... but I enjoy picking out these things. As a musician, I indeed might "plot" as you say to both quote myself from the past, and then try to obscure it. You referred to it as a plot or some negative thing, but Bach did it, Mozart did it, Beethoven did it, Wagner, Stravinsky... I could go on for days. The practice of reinterpreting earlier works has been a valid form of challenge and composition since the days before any culture invented any form of music notation. The Greeks did it to such a degree, the modes were formed from the practice. 
 
Thiago isn't overanalyzing anything. Any musicain with a solid background in theory is going to find this stuff sooner or later. Especially when you're listening to the song and find yourself playing air keys from the big opening keyboard solo to Take the Time over a song you've never heard before and it fits both in relative key and note value. 
 
I picked your post because it most succinctly and clearly made the argument of those on your side. 
 
The reason MP agreed with Thiagos, and the reason I agree with him, and the reason many many others with theory backgrounds agree with him is because not only is the music easy to analyze with the pause button and whatnot, but also because the reference point is so ingrained in our psyches, we'd never have to put IAW to spinning to check our work. We can sing the darn album from start to finish in our heads. I could transcribe and tab (which doesn't mean I can play it flawlessly by the way lol) IAW.... I could probably transcribe much of it by memory, and I could tab it without having to slow it down just because I've heard and seen it played too many times. Keep in mind... I'm a terrible transcriber... I was horrible at note and chord dictation in college. lol I just know that album by heart. I did not find the similarities as fast as Thiagos did. I heard them and sorta kinda recognized it, but I was too into it, and I'd forget about as soon as I'd catch it. And even then, I only caught about 15% of what he did. The second listen made it obvious that every song used the structure (two are more obscured, but I'm more convinced upon every listen that they are there) except for the last one. The third listen was like hearing both albums at one at times... the fourth listen... I stopped hearing them because I wasn't actively listening for the phenomenon again. This time was more like the first where the obvious melody, chordal, or rhythmic references are heard, the places where it is following the structure but isn't referencing a particular rhythm, melody, or progression aren't noticeable unless you look for them. 
 
This stuff is so obvious, I'm convinced that DT did it with a wink and grin in mind. They tip their hat to IAW and then while staying in the song structure, go away from what they just winked at us about. Almost like Beethoven turning a concerto into a piano duet.... you'll catch it if you're paying attention, and you'll think... "you sly dog, that was clever." 
 
If they had any intent on trying to copy a record to capture its success and hope no one notices... they would not sequence or do a variation of such familiar themes. I promise you that. JP wouldn't play Do Fa in succession in octaves with that drum beat going if he didn't want you to remember that very Do Fa in succession on Under A Glass Moon. It literally is THAT elementary. Some of it isn't elementary at all. Some of what they're doing is rather advanced variation and modulation (ie chord substitution to change keys for a length of as short as three chords and then back in a manner that didn't take place on IAW much like Thiagos explained about the hiding the just revealed reference.)
 
What some have seen as attack and insult, is the sort of stuff college theory nerds discuss at lunch. lol Because we know what Beethoven did, we're hardly going to damn DT for doing it too. lol 

[Orthogonal]

^ Brilliant! +1! Would read again. 

[Bertielee]

Music nerds indeed, music snobs even. Why try to convince people who do not want to be convinced? It's a waste of time, from both sides. Enjoy the new DT ; if you don't, listen to something else. As simple as that.

B.Lee

[iamtheeviltwin]

Who listens to music this way?

Musicians who like to dissect compositions and DT is great fodder for dissection.

Here is a post someone at the MP forum made that is quite good...

I think it is important to note that there are people who have jobs at universities all over the world who teach people at an undergrad level to analyze music in this manner before they reach their Junior year of college. My point is, I LOVE this album. I haven't felt this way about any album in years... but I enjoy picking out these things. As a musician, I indeed might "plot" as you say to both quote myself from the past, and then try to obscure it. You referred to it as a plot or some negative thing, but Bach did it, Mozart did it, Beethoven did it, Wagner, Stravinsky... I could go on for days. The practice of reinterpreting earlier works has been a valid form of challenge and composition since the days before any culture invented any form of music notation. The Greeks did it to such a degree, the modes were formed from the practice. 
 
Thiago isn't overanalyzing anything. Any musicain with a solid background in theory is going to find this stuff sooner or later. Especially when you're listening to the song and find yourself playing air keys from the big opening keyboard solo to Take the Time over a song you've never heard before and it fits both in relative key and note value. 
 
I picked your post because it most succinctly and clearly made the argument of those on your side. 
 
The reason MP agreed with Thiagos, and the reason I agree with him, and the reason many many others with theory backgrounds agree with him is because not only is the music easy to analyze with the pause button and whatnot, but also because the reference point is so ingrained in our psyches, we'd never have to put IAW to spinning to check our work. We can sing the darn album from start to finish in our heads. I could transcribe and tab (which doesn't mean I can play it flawlessly by the way lol) IAW.... I could probably transcribe much of it by memory, and I could tab it without having to slow it down just because I've heard and seen it played too many times. Keep in mind... I'm a terrible transcriber... I was horrible at note and chord dictation in college. lol I just know that album by heart. I did not find the similarities as fast as Thiagos did. I heard them and sorta kinda recognized it, but I was too into it, and I'd forget about as soon as I'd catch it. And even then, I only caught about 15% of what he did. The second listen made it obvious that every song used the structure (two are more obscured, but I'm more convinced upon every listen that they are there) except for the last one. The third listen was like hearing both albums at one at times... the fourth listen... I stopped hearing them because I wasn't actively listening for the phenomenon again. This time was more like the first where the obvious melody, chordal, or rhythmic references are heard, the places where it is following the structure but isn't referencing a particular rhythm, melody, or progression aren't noticeable unless you look for them. 
 
This stuff is so obvious, I'm convinced that DT did it with a wink and grin in mind. They tip their hat to IAW and then while staying in the song structure, go away from what they just winked at us about. Almost like Beethoven turning a concerto into a piano duet.... you'll catch it if you're paying attention, and you'll think... "you sly dog, that was clever." 
 
If they had any intent on trying to copy a record to capture its success and hope no one notices... they would not sequence or do a variation of such familiar themes. I promise you that. JP wouldn't play Do Fa in succession in octaves with that drum beat going if he didn't want you to remember that very Do Fa in succession on Under A Glass Moon. It literally is THAT elementary. Some of it isn't elementary at all. Some of what they're doing is rather advanced variation and modulation (ie chord substitution to change keys for a length of as short as three chords and then back in a manner that didn't take place on IAW much like Thiagos explained about the hiding the just revealed reference.)
 
What some have seen as attack and insult, is the sort of stuff college theory nerds discuss at lunch. lol Because we know what Beethoven did, we're hardly going to damn DT for doing it too. lol 

This is a great sentiment and is truly the heart of the matter (and other than a few people) has been the consensus in this and other discussions about the structure of the music. 

However, look at the bolded section there, what Portnoy (and Hooch) and many others have done is use this similarity as a launching point to attack the current output of the band.  They have used it as a way of diminishing the new album and thereby diminishing the quality of the music.  Even Thiago, whose initial analysis is highly flawed overall, may not have "intended" it to be a launching point, he very quickly jumped on the bandwagon to diminish the band's work.  ADTOE is not I&W pt.2, it isn't even structured the same as an album and I think what rankles some is that those who are most loudly making the comparisons seem to be doing it not out of love of the music or band, but out of some malice to the current line-up of the band.

Also I think many of the analysis is trying too hard to find the similarities.  Even your own chart has to gloss over and minimize the differences between the two works to make them seem more alike than they are.  (Completely omitting the instrumental section in your analysis and dismissing the differences in a sentence hurts your argument more than supports it).

[Ben_Jamin]

Its interesting indeed, and not bad because they used structures of old, as many other bands do a lot. It does not deter my enjoyment of the album.

[ResultsMayVary]

What some have seen as attack and insult, is the sort of stuff college theory nerds discuss at lunch. lol Because we know what Beethoven did, we're hardly going to damn DT for doing it too. lol 

This whole quote (which I took out of the quote to minimize space) is a very good respresentation of the respectable argument from that side. The above bolded part is a point i've been trying to convey for the past few pages. The fact that DT has done this for years, that no one should be surprised or extremely pissed off because it. And if they are mad about it, then the outrage should span over the MP-era songs as well. My biggest problem is that people aren't consistent with what they're arguing.