Comparing songs from ADTOE with their I&W counterparts

[The Letter M]

@Reo, consider this your last and final warning.  Your tone here in this thread has been just as unreasonable and inflammatory as in the threads in the P/R section that you have been warned about in the past.  Honestly, I feel you have already earned yourself a ban, but I am going to give you one final chance.  But make no mistake about it:  If you so much as hit the "Enter" key in a manner that irritates me, you are gone.

If I'm going to go out might as well go out with style...

Bosk1, you are a joke of a moderator in my opinion and I should of expected this would be coming from you.  What is most apparent is you like to roll in and out of threads supporting your "buddies".  As far as I can tell most of the time you post off-topic inflammatory nonsense anyway.  You are as guilty as anyone else.

This just so happened to be a thread about the similarities and when those of us started discussing them legitimately a whole bunch of other people came in and started harassing us in just as much, if not more, of an inflammatory manner.  But I don't see you calling any of them out?  All I did was try to clarify my position and defend myself against people calling me laughable and ridiculous.

I'm with Thiago on this.  I have been a musician for 25 years, studied music at a college level,  and have been a DT fan since '93 and spent many of hours learning DT music.  If Thiago hears it, MP hears it, and others here with musical knowledge hear it then I consider that good credible company.  The fact that the rest of you don't doesn't sway me one bit.  You can now get on with congratulating each other on how you ran those crazy conspiracy theorists off the board and get back to your extreme fanboy love affair with DT.

Maybe I will catch some of you over at the DT site forum.  Or maybe not...I got a life to live.

/out

You might have studied music in college, but not English.

BTW, I'd like to add that this whole "debate" is pretty silly, and that I think everyone is nitpicking this to death. Yes, there are SOME similarities, and while they may be musical or structural or compositional, they are similarities nonetheless. However, SOME doesn't mean that there are more, and if you dig to find more, you may convince yourself that there are.

It's like some of you guys are experiencing Apophenia, trying to make connections between IAW and ADTOE just because there are some things in common between a FEW of the songs. I agree, there are some glaring connections, but these guys have been writing music for over 26 years now, and I would think there would be some similarities. You guys make it seem like they're committing crimes against music because they're "reusing charts" (which is a bold and exaggerated claim), when TONS of bands/artists use the same formulas for "charts", structures or arrangements, a hundred times over, even within an album and not just album-to-album, especially in modern rock bands.

I think we should all be thankful that DT haven't succumbed to writing a bunch of 5-minute pop-tunes with Verse/Chorus/Verse/Chorus/Bridge/Chorus structures, and we should be even MORE thankful that they limit these songs to 3 or less an album, which, at the average length of their albums, is less than a quarter of each album.

It really sounds like those who believe the band did this purposefully and are against the idea are just looking for something to hold against the album/music, while others who find it neat just consider it an unfortunate/accidental "nugget" in the growing catalog of Dream Theater. Then there are those who don't see/hear it at all, and those are the ones who are appreciate the album for it's own merits, and not on the merits of being "copies" of old songs. It can be hard to do that, but I feel there is greater appreciation of the music if it's taken in on it's own.

I remember listening to "Sacrificed Sons" and thought it was like "Endless Sacrifice" - a slow metal ballad with a heavy metal instrumental middle section - something that's been passed around DT's "charts" a lot in their first 8 albums. It seems like fans are quick to complain, but less likely to praise. Where were the threads on BC&SL praising the "new" structures that weren't rehashed from old songs?? I don't recall that... then again, when something "new" came about, fans complained anyway - "I don't like the cookie monster vocals" or "I don't like the blastbeats" or "I don't like the airy atmospheric section" or "I don't like the Bebot solo". If ADTOE was 100% different and new from ANYTHING DT have done in the previous 10 albums, fans would complain.

I think we should take these similarities for what they are at face value and just move on to appreciate this album and its 9 songs for what they are and let them speak for themselves, and not compare them to other songs.

-Marc.

[ReaPsTA]

Okay, here's the one thing people say over and over that I'm not understanding.  "You can take any two DT songs and compare them and find similarities."  Fine, but the ADTOE/I&W comparison is on a whole 'nother level.  Here's OTBOA/PMU (This is purely from memory, so a couple little things might be off.)

Keyboard intro (OTBOA only)
Atmospheric clean guitar intro
Drums, keyboards, and bass come in over same ambience
Distorted guitar and keyboards go into full force, section resembles but is not the same as the chorus
Chugging riff
Riff changes, add keyboards
First verse
First verse, more intense second part
Full band transition between verses
Break (Drums/bass in OTBOA, vocals in PMU)
Second verse
Pre-chorus
Guitar lead transition to
Chorus
Chugging riff with new keyboard part
Third verse (distinct from first two)
Pre-chorus repeats
Full band transition between verses repeated as transition before second chorus
Guitar lead transition to
Chorus
Immediate breakdown into spacey/atmospheric keyboard solo, drums playing percussion
Full drums come in during keyboard solo
Quick transition to guitar solo
Guitar solo transitions into
Chorus
Chorus repeats but with different instrumental section
Chugging riff
Chugging riff with added keyboard

The two songs diverge at the end.  OTBOA repeats the beginning, PMU goes into the "all that is too" part.

I guess my question is, except for LNF/UAGM and TITL/AD, what other songs can you compare this specifically?

[Sir GuitarCozmo]

Probably not the best idea to come into someone's "house" they built with their wife for 25 years and fuck their band.

FTFY

[MarlaHooch]

Finally, in Thaigo's defense or anyone who subscribes to his theories, regardless of if he's said offensive things in his posts or whatever, I think it's worth pointing out that anyone who dissects the music at that deep of a level is obviously a huge fan of the band.  Even if, for whatever reason, you disagree with his findings, I think DT are lucky to have fans who are that passionate about what they do.

I get that.  But, again, it isn't what he said, but how he said it.  You don't have to be a huge DT fan to post here.  In fact, you don't have to be a DT fan at all.  But you do have to post in a respectful, tactful way.  He didn't do that, and that is why he is not welcome to post here. 

I'll let others address your Rush analogy.  Since I'm trying to stay fairly neutral, no need for me to point out where I see the flaws in it. 

awwww!!!! hahahaa fine fair enough.  Re:  Thaigo, I didn't read most of his posts but saw he might have gotten banned.  I took it too far in one post as well when I was extra frustrated.  I guess we're all human.

I hope someone else addresses it though!

[Chrissalix]

Okay, here's the one thing people say over and over that I'm not understanding.  "You can take any two DT songs and compare them and find similarities."  Fine, but the ADTOE/I&W comparison is on a whole 'nother level.  Here's OTBOA/PMU (This is purely from memory, so a couple little things might be off.)

Keyboard intro (OTBOA only)
Atmospheric clean guitar intro
Drums, keyboards, and bass come in over same ambience
Distorted guitar and keyboards go into full force, section resembles but is not the same as the chorus
Chugging riff
Riff changes, add keyboards
First verse
First verse, more intense second part
Full band transition between verses
Break (Drums/bass in OTBOA, vocals in PMU)
Second verse
Pre-chorus
Guitar lead transition to
Chorus
Chugging riff with new keyboard part
Third verse (distinct from first two)
Pre-chorus repeats
Full band transition between verses repeated as transition before second chorus
Guitar lead transition to
Chorus
Immediate breakdown into spacey/atmospheric keyboard solo, drums playing percussion
Full drums come in during keyboard solo
Quick transition to guitar solo
Guitar solo transitions into
Chorus
Chorus repeats but with different instrumental section
Chugging riff
Chugging riff with added keyboard

The two songs diverge at the end.  OTBOA repeats the beginning, PMU goes into the "all that is too" part.

I guess my question is, except for LNF/UAGM and TITL/AD, what other songs can you compare this specifically?

Never Enough/Stockholm Syndrome holds up pretty well. My point is that unlike on 8vm, DT and not Muse influenced DT.

[ReaPsTA]

Never Enough/Stockholm Syndrome holds up pretty well. My point is that unlike on 8vm, DT and not Muse influenced DT.

I'm sure it does, but I didn't really want to go there.

I do agree with you though, the lack of obvious nods to other bands on this album is beautiful.  A little bit here and there is fine (like the Tool-styled basslines in Home), but it was getting excessive.

[InertSolo]

Neil Peart quits Rush. Geddy and Alex subsequently find a new (awesome) drummer and do a bunch of interviews claiming they are a new band with a new beginning and that the writing process was so much smoother without Peart around...and then proceed to release a record containing songs built off the exact structures to "The Spirit Of The Radio" and "Tom Sawyer", which Peart contributed to.

Is there any difference with what DT have done here?  I think the idea is a cool concept, but am I not allowed to be of the opinion that this was an ill-timed thing for them to do?  Why now when they have something to prove and not as a 20th anniversary tribute down the road or something?

I don't see a problem at all here really, sure he might have had a hand in crafting those songs but that doesn't mean it would be an issue crafting a song with a similar structure without him being there. It's not like a song structure is an intellectual property. That sort of akin to saying it wouldn't be cool to create a song if "hypothetical band" had songs with guitar harmonies written by their guitarists but all of a sudden couldn't write songs in the same vein anymore on their new album because "x guitarists" got replaced by new guitarists. It's silly.

[duncan3dc]

Wow this sure is entertaining to read.

It'd be nice if someone would address my Rush analogy.  I'll give up if no one does this time and just move on to other topics, but thought I'd give it one last shot because I think it's a valid debate to have.  I've noticed people are happy to point out that I confused the terms "structure" and "arrangement", they accuse me of finding any reason to dislike the album (I don't dislike it, it's just not my favorite DT album, Mangini is my favorite part about it), those of us who hear the structural equivalencies in a few of these songs are told we're conspiracists with no evidence, etc.  But no one ever responds to my main gripe with what DT have done.  So let's try this Rush hypothetical again for anyone who subscribes to the structural similarities in some of these songs:

Neil Peart quits Rush. Geddy and Alex subsequently find a new (awesome) drummer and do a bunch of interviews claiming they are a new band with a new beginning and that the writing process was so much smoother without Peart around...and then proceed to release a record containing songs built off the exact structures to "The Spirit Of The Radio" and "Tom Sawyer", which Peart contributed to.

Is there any difference with what DT have done here?  I think the idea is a cool concept, but am I not allowed to be of the opinion that this was an ill-timed thing for them to do?  Why now when they have something to prove and not as a 20th anniversary tribute down the road or something?

I don't think there would be a difference, and if I was a Rush fan I think that I would love it if they did that.
Re-using a structure is not some sort of cop-out that automatically gets you a similar song. As many have pointed out, the songs can (and often do) sound completely different. You've not really gained anything by using an existing structure, you still need to write some interesting music to play within that structure.

It's not like they've come to write the new album, and thought "Damn, we can't write a structure. How are we gonna put together all these riffs and melodies we have? I know, lets grab some of Pornoty's work and use that". Which in my opinion is how you're making it sound.

Oh and I'd say now is a perfect time to do a 20th anniversary tribute to Image & Words 

[ReaPsTA]

Is there any difference with what DT have done here?  I think the idea is a cool concept, but am I not allowed to be of the opinion that this was an ill-timed thing for them to do?  Why now when they have something to prove and not as a 20th anniversary tribute down the road or something?

It might be ill-timed.  But the place that it seems to be going is the implication that they tried to pull a fast one on the fans by imitating the song structures.  They've been asked about it in interviews exactly zero times, we have no idea how they'd respond if they were asked about it.

[The Letter M]

Never Enough/Stockholm Syndrome holds up pretty well. My point is that unlike on 8vm, DT and not Muse influenced DT.

I'm sure it does, but I didn't really want to go there.

I do agree with you though, the lack of obvious nods to other bands on this album is beautiful.  A little bit here and there is fine (like the Tool-styled basslines in Home), but it was getting excessive.

Indeed and I believe that MP took all the "let's make that part/song sound like __(artist/song)__!!!" with him when he left. ADTOE sounds like Dream Theater, and even if in some people's minds it sounds like IAW-era DT, then at least they sound like one of the best DT albums ever, so why complain about that? Would you guys rather have had an album with (whole) songs that sound like U2, Coldplay, Muse, Metallica, Iron Maiden, Yes, Rush, Genesis, Kansas, The Who, The Beatles, and Pink Floyd?

Even if ADTOE has similarities to IAW, thank goodness because to be honest, IAW is fantastic, and so is ADTOE, so I'm glad that Dream Theater decided to sound like themselves for once!

-Marc.

[ResultsMayVary]

Never Enough/Stockholm Syndrome holds up pretty well. My point is that unlike on 8vm, DT and not Muse influenced DT.

I'm sure it does, but I didn't really want to go there.

I do agree with you though, the lack of obvious nods to other bands on this album is beautiful.  A little bit here and there is fine (like the Tool-styled basslines in Home), but it was getting excessive.

Like many people have stated before me, i'm perfectly fine and would prefer Dream Theater to write music that they were inspired by themselves to write rather than inspired by other bands.

[duncan3dc]

It really sounds like those who believe the band did this purposefully and are against the idea are just looking for something to hold against the album/music

Are these people on this forum? Can you point out some who are against the idea? You sound like you've seen a few, but I've only seen Marla

[The Letter M]

It really sounds like those who believe the band did this purposefully and are against the idea are just looking for something to hold against the album/music

Are these people on this forum? Can you point out some who are against the idea? You sound like you've seen a few, but I've only seen Marla

I can't name names as I've really been avoiding reading/replying to this whole thing anyway, but it's just a general feeling I've sensed from fans and reviews who have made the comparison. Some think it's cool, some think it's not, and it just seems like those who don't like it are just looking for a reason to complain, to be honest. It's the idea that if you look for something to complain about, you'll end up finding a reason (if not making it yourself).

-Marc.

[Orthogonal]

Well, this whole discussion just keeps going in circles. Perhaps we should give up on it for now. People are too emotionally invested right now. Maybe after some time has passed and the dust has settled, we can talk about it again, but for now I'm just going to bow out of this thread.

[duncan3dc]

I can't name names as I've really been avoiding reading/replying to this whole thing anyway, but it's just a general feeling I've sensed from fans and reviews who have made the comparison. Some think it's cool, some think it's not, and it just seems like those who don't like it are just looking for a reason to complain, to be honest. It's the idea that if you look for something to complain about, you'll end up finding a reason (if not making it yourself).

Even if in some people's minds it sounds like IAW-era DT, then at least they sound like one of the best DT albums ever, so why complain about that?

I don't think it sounds like Images & Words (or at least no more than any other of their albums).

I've only seen 1 person here complaining, and I think 1 person over on Portnoy's forum. Hardly enough to justify statements that sound like they encompass a significant portion of the fanbase.

[Chrissalix]

Well, this whole discussion just keeps going in circles. Perhaps we should give up on it for now. People are too emotionally invested right now. Maybe after some time has passed and the dust has settled, we can talk about it again, but for now I'm just going to bow out of this thread.

Full circle, Octavariumnuggetz!

[ResultsMayVary]

It really sounds like those who believe the band did this purposefully and are against the idea are just looking for something to hold against the album/music

Are these people on this forum? Can you point out some who are against the idea? You sound like you've seen a few, but I've only seen Marla

Marla and Thiago, to name two, but i'm pretty sure that's it.

[The Letter M]

It really sounds like those who believe the band did this purposefully and are against the idea are just looking for something to hold against the album/music

Are these people on this forum? Can you point out some who are against the idea? You sound like you've seen a few, but I've only seen Marla

Marla and Thiago, to name two, but i'm pretty sure that's it.

Well, if it's only a couple, I guess it just seemed like there are more to me when there are were only to show for it. 

-Marc.

[MarlaHooch]

It really sounds like those who believe the band did this purposefully and are against the idea are just looking for something to hold against the album/music

Are these people on this forum? Can you point out some who are against the idea? You sound like you've seen a few, but I've only seen Marla

I can't name names as I've really been avoiding reading/replying to this whole thing anyway, but it's just a general feeling I've sensed from fans and reviews who have made the comparison. Some think it's cool, some think it's not, and it just seems like those who don't like it are just looking for a reason to complain, to be honest. It's the idea that if you look for something to complain about, you'll end up finding a reason (if not making it yourself).

-Marc.

False.  I'm a huge fan, I think Mangini is awesome, and I support DT's decision to carry on without MP.  There are parts of the album I like (instrumental part of Outcry, music to OTBoA particularly the solo towards the end, drumming on everything, most of the production aspects) and parts that I don't like, including this issue.

Why is it that some people can just say "the album sucks" and that's fine, yet if I have a legitimate gripe with a specific part of the album and I outline exactly why, somehow I'm just looking for a reason to complain?  I don't think that's fair.

[Jaffa]

In my experience, if someone just says that a DT album 'sucks', bosk usually ends up warning them to be more respectful.

[MarlaHooch]

True.  How about, for example, I think BC&SL has some of the most badass music they've ever written, but I think the lyrics to Count of Tuscany are just completely silly and kinda ruin the song for me.  Am I a fan who enjoys the album for the most part and just expressing one less-than-glowing opinion about it, or am I just looking to complain by stating that?

Is there any difference with what DT have done here?  I think the idea is a cool concept, but am I not allowed to be of the opinion that this was an ill-timed thing for them to do?  Why now when they have something to prove and not as a 20th anniversary tribute down the road or something?

It might be ill-timed.  But the place that it seems to be going is the implication that they tried to pull a fast one on the fans by imitating the song structures.  They've been asked about it in interviews exactly zero times, we have no idea how they'd respond if they were asked about it.

I can see that.  I personally don't think they're trying to pull a fast one...they know their fanbase too well to think no one would catch it.  The farthest I'll go is suggest maybe it helped them get an album done quicker and it could be interpreted as "cutting corners" in a way, but I obviously have no proof of this. 

I'll stick with, "it's a cool idea but I personally think it's ill-timed."

[Zook]

I'm not a music expert. I haven't studied shit, but I hear all of what Thiago is talking about... Except the Surrounded and Take The Time stuff. The Another Day claim is pushing it as well. I can't listen to LNF without hearing UAGM, but seriously what's the big deal? Thiago, why is this so important to you? You've made your point, you even wound up on Blabbermouth and other internet news mediums. Your message has been heard. Let's all move on, enjoy the music, and you need to finish your own thing. I don't want this debacle effecting negatively on what I'm sure is to be some awesome music in Bad Salad. And I don't care how similar you sound to Dream Theater, that you guys use the same damn instruments or whatever. I love the Dream Theater style of Prog Metal and it's not like Bad Salad is a clone band. I don't think any of the bands that have been accused of being DT clones are so.

Anyway, enough of this malarkey. It's tired and old, and no one wants to argue about it anymore.

[bosk1]

Zook gets it.  Getting it is what Zook is doing.  Getting it and Zook; these things go together.  Gets it, Zook does.

[ResultsMayVary]

Zook gets it.  Getting it is what Zook is doing.  Getting it and Zook; these things go together.  Gets it, Zook does.

I see what you did there and there and there and there.

[farsight]

WTF, why is Tiago Camos' youtube channel appearing in the channel recommendations everytime I open youtube?
NUGGETZ!

[Zook]

I made an edit of Lost Not Forgotten, not that the song needed it. It's just fun to do. But Anyway, I took out a few things that sounded a little too much like UAGM, and it actually sounds pretty good and keeps the same good flow. New track length is 8:50.

Too bad no one will ever be able to hear this... Wah wah waaaaaaaahhh

[Cranky]

I wonder what kind of Hot Pockets DT likes...
I can see JR liking ham and cheese,
JP seems like a pepperoni kind of guy,
JLB ... maybe philly cheese steak?
Mangini seems like he'd like mexican style, or maybe the new ones with the pretzel bread...
while I can't see JMX liking Hot Pockets at all..

So much to think about, hmmmmm...

[theseoafs]

It'd be nice if someone would address my Rush analogy.  I'll give up if no one does this time and just move on to other topics, but thought I'd give it one last shot because I think it's a valid debate to have.  I've noticed people are happy to point out that I confused the terms "structure" and "arrangement", they accuse me of finding any reason to dislike the album (I don't dislike it, it's just not my favorite DT album, Mangini is my favorite part about it), those of us who hear the structural equivalencies in a few of these songs are told we're conspiracists with no evidence, etc.  But no one ever responds to my main gripe with what DT have done.  So let's try this Rush hypothetical again for anyone who subscribes to the structural similarities in some of these songs:

Neil Peart quits Rush. Geddy and Alex subsequently find a new (awesome) drummer and do a bunch of interviews claiming they are a new band with a new beginning and that the writing process was so much smoother without Peart around...and then proceed to release a record containing songs built off the exact structures to "The Spirit Of The Radio" and "Tom Sawyer", which Peart contributed to.

Is there any difference with what DT have done here?  I think the idea is a cool concept, but am I not allowed to be of the opinion that this was an ill-timed thing for them to do?  Why now when they have something to prove and not as a 20th anniversary tribute down the road or something?

The "Rush analogy" is fundamentally flawed. It doesn't bring anything new to the table, it just replaces your view of the situation with the members of Rush. (Not to mention that Rush would NEVER continue if Peart left, but that's pretty far beside the point.)

Was your point only to make the situation less personal? Well, I'll address the "Rush analogy" by saying that if Rush did that (and confirmed publicly that they did it purposefully), that would be kind of a bummer. Though the songs themselves are much simpler than Pull Me Under and Under a Glass Moon and would be a little bit easier to unintentionally replicate, an egregious rip-off would leave a bitter taste in my mouth. The same would happen if DT did that, but they have done no such thing.

[KevShmev]

The Rush comparison is a bad one since Geddy and Alex write all of the music (melodies, arrangements, song structures, etc.). 

[Adami]

I have no idea why structure would be this important.

[LCArenas]

I have no idea why structure would be this important.

THIS

[theseoafs]

I have no idea why structure would be this important.

Structure is important if and only if the structures were intentionally lifted, which, in that case, makes the DT boys seem uncreative/lazy/dishonest/otherwise worse without MP in the minds of some.

[Adami]

I have no idea why structure would be this important.

Structure is important if and only if the structures were intentionally lifted, which, in that case, makes the DT boys seem uncreative/lazy/dishonest/otherwise worse without MP in the minds of some.

Why would that make it more important? Plus, this isn't directed at you, but how anyone can listen to ADTOE and say that the album is uninspired/lazy/dishonest and so forth simply because Lost Not Forgotten has a few similarities (structure wise) to an older song is beyond me. That's like saying Transformers 3 was a horrible movie because 2 small tiny meaningless scenes were lifted from The Island. Transformers 3 is a horrible movie for much better reasons than that,

[theseoafs]

Why would that make it more important? Plus, this isn't directed at you, but how anyone can listen to ADTOE and say that the album is uninspired/lazy/dishonest and so forth simply because Lost Not Forgotten has a few similarities (structure wise) to an older song is beyond me. That's like saying Transformers 3 was a horrible movie because 2 small tiny meaningless scenes were lifted from The Island. Transformers 3 is a horrible movie for much better reasons than that,

I'll let the people who actually believe that the band purposefully copied the so-called "charts" explain what is so bad about their having copied the so-called "charts". I'm still kind of unclear about it myself.

[orcus116]

It really sounds like those who believe the band did this purposefully and are against the idea are just looking for something to hold against the album/music, while others who find it neat just consider it an unfortunate/accidental "nugget" in the growing catalog of Dream Theater.

That's pretty much what it boils down to. I know Images And Words like the back of my hand and I couldn't (and still can't) pick up on a single of those these "stolen chart" things. It's like someone took a stray "maybe this'll be their new PMU" to heart and started desperately linking the two together with blanket fragments like "clean guitar into" and "technical piano" without putting any actual thought into how the songs are actually constructed. If you really wanna find something hard enough, you'll find it. I mean I can see picking up a similar riff or two but I've seen some people insist that on first listen how obvious it was they borrowed from old song structures. First listen for an album full of new music and the first thing you're really zoning in on is the song structure? Really? That's complete bullshit.