Dream Theater has 2 original members: Does this make them lose credibility?

[Madman Shepherd]

It sure doesn't for me.  My favorite band of all time is Black Sabbath and the albums with Tony iommi as the only original member are as good or almost as good as the ones with 3-4 original members. 

When it comes to posing this questions DT has a few advantages:

-They have 3 original members of the "classic" lineup: Most people don't really think Dream Theater *started* until Images & Words, even if they are aware they had one album before it.  Kind of like if a band had a different singer when they released a demo in high school, a lot of people don't really count that.  In addition, a band like Deep Purple has one original member but really didn't find their groove until their fourth album, In Rock, when they had ditched 2 of the 5 original members and formed the legendary lineup that would go on to record Smoke on the Water.  3 of those 5 members are in Deep Purple today.  To take that a step further, with the exceptions of Images and Words and Awake, one could argue DT didn't find their groove until SFAM, giving them 4 consistent members.

- DT in the last 13 years has recruited veterans to fill in instead of amateurs.  I can also assume that they are equal partners to an extent, maybe with the exception of Mike Mangini.  If DT had gotten someone in a DT tribute band or a fresh face from Berklee to fill in, it might lose them some credibility.

-DT's has a hardcore fanbase: Short of them releasing a concept album about flatulence, we will probably buy whatever they release. 

Opinions?

[Jaffa]

I can't really imagine why it would make them lose any credibility. 

[MoraWintersoul]

What's credibility in a band context? Even if I replaced it with integrity, I still wouldn't say they are, so I agree with you.

[SystematicThought]

Sure, maybe if all the founding members left, then it would because then DT is just a name. But two original members isn't bad at all. Actually kind of a rarity in music

[senecadawg2]

answering the question, no.

[wolfking]

No.  Pretty absurd thread tbh.

[Ħ]

What do you mean by "credibility"?

DT is whatever DT is. DT was one thing before, and now DT is a different thing. In other words, the development of DT over the years doesn't cause them to lose credibility or authenticity.

[bosk1]

The answer, IMO, is "no."  But I don't understand why people are acting like they don't understand the question or that it is a dumb question.  It isn't.  This question/issue comes up all the time.

[wolfking]

This question/issue comes up all the time.

It does?

[Chino]

I count JLB as an original member.

[Super Dude]

Jethro Tull is now only essentially Ian Anderson and *sorta* Martin Barre.

[Madman Shepherd]

The answer, IMO, is "no."  But I don't understand why people are acting like they don't understand the question or that it is a dumb question.  It isn't.  This question/issue comes up all the time.

Thanks for the support.  Was kinda hoping it would create more discussion.  Let me put it this way, here is a brief list of my favorite bands

Deep Purple
Black Sabbath
Uriah Heep
Guns N' Roses
King Diamond/Mercyful Fate

The first four bands have spent several years with only one original member and has caused a lot of people to say, "It's not REALLY Black Sabbath without Ozzy/Geezer/Bill" or "It's not REALLY GNR without Slash"

Even with Mercyful Fate some of my friends say they will not ever buy another CD unless Michael Denner comes back and that band has at least 2 original members.

So how about this, tell me WHY you think DT is credible with only 2 original members. 

What if John Myung quit?

C'mon people, humor me and lets have a discussion

[Sigz]

So how about this, tell me WHY you think DT is credible with only 2 original members. 

Because the members that are in it, even if not original, have been a major part of the band for a considerable length of time. Sure, JLB isn't an original member, but I doubt anyone considers Dominici to 'be' Dream Theater moreso than JLB.

[robwebster]

I think the problem with bands like Guns 'n' Roses is that they don't have any members from their history remaining. New members aren't part of the band, they're stoking the brand. They're not "proper" members in that sense.

Dream Theater, on the other hand, has five contributors, 40% of whom were founding members, 60% of whom were present for their breakthrough album, and 80% of whom have been present for over half of their career. Jordan Rudess isn't just the bloke they got in to play keyboards and make a wodge of money, Jordan Rudess was a co-writer for a lot of the band's most beloved tracks, and contributed to Scenes from a Memory, which, regardless of where I'd personally rank it, is probably their most unanimously liked album among fans.

It's night and day. This is another chapter of a band that's still running, not an epilogue. That's where credibility's lost with long-runners, and it's miles away from where Dream Theater are today. Completely different ballparks.

[wolfking]

I don't think it matters at all.  Take these bands for instance;

Stratovarius (no original members left)
Iced Earth (1 original member)
Megadeth (2 original members)

Plus there's more, it's a common thing to have little original members left.

[The Letter M]

They may not be Rush, but they're certainly doing a LOT better than Yes, which only currently has ONE original member in Chris Squire, who has been on every Yes album. And speaking of Rush, while Neil Peart has written nearly ALL of the band's lyrics since his joining, he wasn't an original member, but people don't think of John Rutsey as the heart of Rush when he was the original drummer.

Petrucci has always been the fore-runner of the band, anyway, from a musical and lyrical point of view. While Portnoy was the face and heart of the band, I'd consider Petrucci to be the body and soul. He's had his hand most in the music and lyrics since the beginning, and you have to remember, while Mike, John and John were the original trio in Majesty, it was the Johns who found Mike together in the practice rooms at Berklee. The Johns were childhood friends and had only met Mike in college, so as far as I am concerned, Dream Theater is, without a doubt, Myung and Petrucci. Mike came along and gave them spirit, but we all know the spirit carries on, but the band still exists solely because of the Johns, and even though it was Mike's baby, he was only the father, Petrucci was definitely the mother.

-Marc.

[Super Dude]

I think the problem with bands like Guns 'n' Roses is that they don't have any members from their history remaining. New members aren't part of the band, they're stoking the brand. They're not "proper" members in that sense.

Dream Theater, on the other hand, has five contributors, 40% of whom were founding members, 60% of whom were present for their breakthrough album, and 80% of whom have been present for over half of their career. Jordan Rudess isn't just the bloke they got in to play keyboards and make a wodge of money, Jordan Rudess was a co-writer for a lot of the band's most beloved tracks, and contributed to Scenes from a Memory, which, regardless of where I'd personally rank it, is probably their most unanimously liked album among fans.

It's night and day. This is another chapter of a band that's still running, not an epilogue. That's where credibility's lost with long-runners, and it's miles away from where Dream Theater are today. Completely different ballparks.

I think that's a lot of it. I've said it and heard it said ever since I got here: like him or not, JLB is the voice of Dream Theater. His vocals have graced ten Dream Theater albums over the course of twenty years. He's just as emblematic of the DT sound and the band itself by now as MP ever was.

[Fiery Winds]

First, having more original members has nothing to do with the band's credibility.  As mentioned above, Petrucci has been the primary driving force (along with MP), so as long as he is part of the band, Dream Theater will always be Dream Theater.

Second, if we look at the chart of members in relationship to album releases, we actually have a majority of members present that are responsible for most of their catalogue. 

[Pols Voice]

and even though it was Mike's baby, he was only the father, Petrucci was definitely the mother.

Please...no more of these analogies.

As for the original question, no, the band doesn't lose credibility. When a band gradually replaces members, it isn't as big a deal as when a bunch of guys leave in a short time and are replaced quickly.

[Jaffa]

The answer, IMO, is "no."  But I don't understand why people are acting like they don't understand the question or that it is a dumb question.  It isn't.  This question/issue comes up all the time.

I apologize if I gave the impression that I thought it was a dumb question.  I don't think it's a dumb question.

I just don't understand the mindset that a band needs all of its original members to still be credible.  Is Images and Words a less credible album than When Dream and Day Unite?  Fewer original DT members are present on I&W than on WDaDU.  In fact, one could make the argument that WDaDU is the only 'true' Dream Theater album, because it's the only one with all of the original members.  And if someone wants to think of it that way, that's their option, but as far as I'm concerned, they're bonkers.  DT didn't lose themselves with the loss of Charlie Dominici, they redefined themselves.  And in my opinion, the change was for the better.  It didn't cost them credibility, it asserted their credibility. 

As for today, yes, they have two original members left.  And a singer who's been with them for ten albums.  And a keyboardist who's played on twice as many of their albums as their original keyboardist.  I don't know how anyone could suggest at this point in time that JLB and JR aren't 'true' members of Dream Theater. 

[The Letter M]

and even though it was Mike's baby, he was only the father, Petrucci was definitely the mother.

Please...no more of these analogies.

Hahaha was waiting to see how long it would take before someone said something!

As for the original question, no, the band doesn't lose credibility. When a band gradually replaces members, it isn't as big a deal as when a bunch of guys leave in a short time and are replaced quickly.

This is true. Going back to my Yes example, their change between Drama and 90125 was DRASTIC, with only Chris and Alan being the returning members - Jon, Tony and Trevor were "new" to the band, not having been on the past record when 90125 came out; Trevor was completely new, and Tony hadn't been on an album since their 3rd release, 7 albums prior.

And the line-up changes in DT have been pretty gradual, only being 1 instrument at a time. In the early days, it was finding the right vocalist, then a new keyboardist (twice), and after that, the band was stable (with 4/5ths of it's CURRENT line-up), releasing 5 albums in the span of a decade. Not bad! A lot of fans might consider THAT line-up the core of the band, where their "credibility" lies, even though Jordan and James aren't original members.

-Marc.

[j]

2 major factors to consider with this question, I think:

1) Band dynamics.  (For example, is one guy is responsible for writing practically everything while the other guys just play?)

2) Material before and after lineup changes.

In DT's case, their writing process is allegedly largely collaborative (although some may contribute more than others, as I think is the case in most bands), and their performances incorporate all players significantly and dynamically.  And they have released material with each of their lineups that I think most fans would agree is of similar quality and "vision" to what has become associated with DT over the years, despite differing opinions regarding the band's "eras," or even individual releases.

I think that this combination is very rare, especially for a band of DT's longevity.  But that still won't stop some from rejecting a band's output after member X's departure, regardless of the circumstances or of the quality of subsequent releases.

-J

[Super Dude]

I have officially retconned ACOS, FII, SFAM, SDOIT, TOT...

DT has not actually released any albums since Awake.

[Glass Moonlight]

No. As far as I'm concerned the 1998 lineup has been the core Dream Theater band. Although Mike left they still have 4 of the major members left, possibly 3 if you want to count Kevin as the signature DT keyboardist instead of JR.

[johncal]

That would be like saying the New York Philharmonic lost credibility because they constantly change musicians. Since Dream Theater have stuck with the same basic format, same writing (which is the most important aspect IMO) and have improved the quality of music by adding better musicians than they originally had, I look at it as gaining credibility if anything. I think Petrucci's vision is stronger than ever.

[Kotowboy]

U2 are the only band I can think of who have *NEVER* had a lineup change in over 30 years.

That is almost unprecedented.

[Perpetual Change]

Charlie doesn't count imo. James is just as important as an original member. Just as Bruce is to Iron Maiden. And Jordan presided over the band more than all the other guys combined and then some. DT is technically two original members but four members from the most well known, classic lineup. James is their Dickinson and Jordan is their Alan White.

[Mindflux]

U2 are the only band I can think of who have *NEVER* had a lineup change in over 30 years.

That is almost unprecedented.

Phish too

[johncal]

They may not be Rush, but they're certainly doing a LOT better than Yes, which only currently has ONE original member in Chris Squire, who has been on every Yes album. And speaking of Rush, while Neil Peart has written nearly ALL of the band's lyrics since his joining, he wasn't an original member, but people don't think of John Rutsey as the heart of Rush when he was the original drummer.

Petrucci has always been the fore-runner of the band, anyway, from a musical and lyrical point of view. While Portnoy was the face and heart of the band, I'd consider Petrucci to be the body and soul. He's had his hand most in the music and lyrics since the beginning, and you have to remember, while Mike, John and John were the original trio in Majesty, it was the Johns who found Mike together in the practice rooms at Berklee. The Johns were childhood friends and had only met Mike in college, so as far as I am concerned, Dream Theater is, without a doubt, Myung and Petrucci. Mike came along and gave them spirit, but we all know the spirit carries on, but the band still exists solely because of the Johns, and even though it was Mike's baby, he was only the father, Petrucci was definitely the mother.

-Marc.

I hear what you're saying, but I doubt if Petrucci himself would say they're a lot better than yes. From a musicianship standpoint, clearly. From a writing standpoint, I'm not so sure. The music was the same, yet different. In fact, Petrucci routinely mentions early Yes albums as a huge inspiration. Ask Jordan who one of his keyboard hero's is and you'll hear him say Wakeman, who in my opinion may not be as technically proficient, but I think played much more memorable leads overall. And by the way, I'll take DT any day over Rush. I like Rush, but after 20 minutes it starts to get grating and repetitious.

[johncal]

U2 are the only band I can think of who have *NEVER* had a lineup change in over 30 years.

That is almost unprecedented.

\
Hall & Oats

[Pols Voice]

U2 are the only band I can think of who have *NEVER* had a lineup change in over 30 years.

That is almost unprecedented.

ZZ Top. Same three guys since their debut album 42 years ago.

[Madman Shepherd]

Excellent posts people!  This is the discussion I was hoping to have.  To be honest, I knew that everyone would like say that it hasn't lessened their credibility, I was just interested in hearing everybody's opinion why. 

As for the original question, no, the band doesn't lose credibility. When a band gradually replaces members, it isn't as big a deal as when a bunch of guys leave in a short time and are replaced quickly.

I can see this.  As I said earlier, Black Sabbath is my favorite band but Tony Iommi has been the only consistent member.  When Seventh Star came out it was the first time he had at least not had one other original member.  He then released 3 more albums as the only consistent member until Geezer came back for two albums and then it was back to just Tony.

Even though I can understand why people might not think of it as a true Sabbath lineup because it did change so drastically, I do not think they have had a single bad album and I think it would be trivial to get caught up in the mindset that it should have the same sound you personally prefer. 

I just don't understand the mindset that a band needs all of its original members to still be credible.

You and I are one of the few that think this. 

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

Answer to the OP:
No.

James LaBrie has been around for 21 years and Jordan Rudess for 14. That's a big chunk of DT history.

[snapple]

Well, on another forum, they won't even call DT "DT" anymore because MP isn't in the band.

[BlobVanDam]

I'm in agreement with the general consensus.
Musical credibility has little to do with how many original members you have. I think it can definitely hurt a band if they have a revolving door of members, but I basically count JLB as an original member (because I don't count WDADU as a legit album), and JR has been in the band for so long that he's earned well enough "credibility" for all intents and purposes.