Dream Theater self titled album discussion - [SPOILER FREE DISCUSSION ONLY]

[adastra]

I think the band logo may be just a sticker or on the plastic or something... maybe a slipcase. I don't know if it'll be on the printed version.

I was thinking the same, It would be better that way :3

[TheGreatPretender]

I think the band logo may be just a sticker or on the plastic or something... maybe a slipcase. I don't know if it'll be on the printed version.

Yeah, but that would sort of defeat the purpose of this:

It would just be the symbol, a very understated confidence and basically not titling it, not having our mind on the cover and only using the symbol, was a bold, strong statement. Kinda like they do in the movies when a new Superman is coming out. You see an S and you don´t have to say anything else.

[aurorablind]

It looks like the band logo is on the standard-cd edition and on the artwork for the digital album.
The deluxe edition, LP and box-set doesn't seem to have it.

https://store.roadrunnerrecords.com/music-1/cd/dream-theater-dream-theater-cd.html

[?]

I think the band logo may be just a sticker or on the plastic or something... maybe a slipcase. I don't know if it'll be on the printed version.

Yeah, but that would sort of defeat the purpose of this:

It would just be the symbol, a very understated confidence and basically not titling it, not having our mind on the cover and only using the symbol, was a bold, strong statement. Kinda like they do in the movies when a new Superman is coming out. You see an S and you don´t have to say anything else.

Record labels often put a sticker on the cover if the band name isn't there - Ghost Reveries by Opeth comes to mind and that album was released by Roadrunner too.

[TheGreatPretender]

Record labels often put a sticker on the cover if the band name isn't there - Ghost Reveries by Opeth comes to mind and that album was released by Roadrunner too.

Doesn't really change the fact that it completely negates it from being a "bold statement".

[?]

Record labels often put a sticker on the cover if the band name isn't there - Ghost Reveries by Opeth comes to mind and that album was released by Roadrunner too.

Doesn't really change the fact that it completely negates it from being a "bold statement".

Unfortunately yeah, but I bet the label people want to be sure even the casual fans and people who have just discovered the band will know it's a Dream Theater release and sales are more important than artistic statements.

[TheGreatPretender]

Unfortunately yeah, but I bet the label people want to be sure even the casual fans and people who have just discovered the band will know it's a Dream Theater release and sales are more important than artistic statements.

Yeah, but they should really think about the flipside of it. If people can't recognize DT just from the logo, it's still a cool and intriguing cover. Whenever I see an album cover without a title, where it's just the art, I always pick it up and see what it is. And the spine would state the band and album title anyway, so you can find out there and then, but if I look at an album, and even if the cover is cool, but it says, "Darkness Falls" or something, I immediately go, "Oh, it's them. Nah, I'll pass."
Basically, what I'm saying is, they're completely dismissing the intrigue factor.

[wasteland]

I thought having the band name on there was just for promo stuff, although I'd prefer it with an album title anyway. I've never liked albums without words on them. I want images AND words.

Better an cover without words or a cover with the wrong font?

[?]

BTW, I'm not saying RR only think about the sales and don't give a damn about DT's image or music - my point is that they don't want to lose potential buyers because of such a small thing as the lack of band name on the front cover or a sticker. Not everyone recognizes the Majesty symbol or finds the cover cool enough to check out who's made the album.

[BlobVanDam]

Unfortunately yeah, but I bet the label people want to be sure even the casual fans and people who have just discovered the band will know it's a Dream Theater release and sales are more important than artistic statements.

Yeah, but they should really think about the flipside of it. If people can't recognize DT just from the logo, it's still a cool and intriguing cover. Whenever I see an album cover without a title, where it's just the art, I always pick it up and see what it is. And the spine would state the band and album title anyway, so you can find out there and then, but if I look at an album, and even if the cover is cool, but it says, "Darkness Falls" or something, I immediately go, "Oh, it's them. Nah, I'll pass."
Basically, what I'm saying is, they're completely dismissing the intrigue factor.

I'm not convinced this intrigue factor is that strong for the average person buying an album. I look at band names more than I'd ever pay attention to an album cover to sell me an album.
Not to mention that in any other scenario, an album cover without writing on it would warn me right off, not intrigue me.

[TheGreatPretender]

Not to mention that in any other scenario, an album cover without writing on it would warn me right off, not intrigue me.

How come?

[BlackInk]

I prefer it without the text. Now that they fixed the planet cut-off the cover is just awesome as it is.

[serrano]

When i read that it was going to be a self titled album the first cover art that came to my mind was a white majesty symbol on black background without the band name on it. That would have been a bold statement.

[BlobVanDam]

Not to mention that in any other scenario, an album cover without writing on it would warn me right off, not intrigue me.

How come?

Because it would ring alarm bells of pretentiousness, like their "art" is so important that actually letting the album cover serve its purpose of telling people what it is would ruin it.

A bit different in the case of a self titled with an identifiable logo, but I'm still not a fan of the approach.

[TheGreatPretender]

When i read that it was going to be a self titled album the first cover art that came to my mind was a white majesty symbol on black background without the band name on it. That would have been a bold statement.

No, that would have been artsy and pretentious, IMO. Minimalism is overrated. Especially since we're talking about Progressive Metal here.

The cover should've been of a guy wanking. Now THAT'S a bold statement that reflects the music. 

[serrano]

The cover shows actually a bright majesty symbol, a planet and black background. Isn't it just half assed minimalism?

[aprilethereal]

That symbol...still looks...wrong. My wish didn't come true. I guess they're never gonna fix it. Am i the only one perturbed by this? Does no one really care? Why is this not talked about more? Why is no one asking the band members about this in any of the interviews? Please, can anyone with a hotline to the DT camp find out? anything. I need at least a reason why.

The symbol was changed intentionally. No need to fix that because of some fans whining about the change. They chose to self-title their twelfth album, and slightly altering the logo simply supports the statement of "this is the definition of Dream Theater in 2013".

[TheGreatPretender]

I don't know if that's what it's about, but a slight redesign doesn't hurt.

Here's the thing, of all the album covers, this is the biggest and clearest majesty symbol we've seen so far, and unlike on their previous albums, where it's a part of the background, or subtly placed into one of the objects on the art itself, this time, it's the focus of the picture, the center piece of the album art. So because all the focus is on the symbol now, maybe they decided that they needed to make it a little nicer, like, reshaping the O so that it isn't so close to the serifs.

Either way, it's still the same symbol, it's still very recognizable, and frankly, I like the change.

[Tom Bombadil]

I don't think I wouldve ever realized the symbol was different if it hadn't been mentioned on here. I mean it's obviously the same symbol, they just tweaked some things here and there, but I can't see how such tiny changes would alienate fans.

[cyberdrummer]

Don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure JP explained at the listening party why the album cover was just the Majesty symbol (bold statement etc.). No mention of the band name being on it.

I think a sticker or slipcase is the best explanation. 

[The Stray Seed]

The symbol looks more majestic than before. And the liquid metal effect is just gorgeous. I really like it.

[TheGreatPretender]

T-1000 would certainly approve.

[Kotowboy]

I understand the logo in the center and all,but what has the earth got to do with it?What does it represent more specifically?
Oh,and what is all this thing about 5,8,13,fiveeightforum etc.Can someone elaborate on that?I may be missing something.Thank you.

Most of the Octavarium album is based around 5 and 8.

https://dt.spatang.com/octavarium.php

[Whatsername]

I don't think I wouldve ever realized the symbol was different if it hadn't been mentioned on here. I mean it's obviously the same symbol, they just tweaked some things here and there, but I can't see how such tiny changes would alienate fans.

Same. I would never have noticed the change if people hadn't freaked. It's their symbol. They can change it if they want. It's still instantly recognizable as the Majesty symbol, so I don't understand what the fuss is about.

[Kotowboy]

Same. I would never have noticed the change if people hadn't freaked. It's their symbol. They can change it if they want. It's still instantly recognizable as the Majesty symbol, so I don't understand what the fuss is about.

^ . Agreed. So it's a bit taller. Whoop do freaking do. 

[fadetoblackdude7]

I didn't like the cover when I first saw it, mainly because of how plain it is and the fact that the logo is missing. I knew that the symbol would be the focus of the cover, obviously, but I thought it would have a lot of details surrounding it, like some cool scenery for example.

But now, I've learned to quite like it. Like JP said, there's no title and just the symbol on the front and you have to find out what's inside...

[425]

But now, I've learned to quite like it. Like JP said, there's no title and just the symbol on the front and you have to find out what's inside...

Obviously what's inside is the enemy.

[Tis BOOLsheet]

I think the album cover is pretty cool. I like that it's something new. I'm glad that there are no weird children on the cover or random objects. And it does sorta make a bold statement. Everything about the way this album has been presented is saying this is going to be amazing. I'm expecting it to be in the first tier of DT albums along with Images, SFAM, etc.

[RMGadelha]

That is true. I don't necessarily hate children, but I do hate children in the cover arts of my favorite albums. Don't ask me why, I just do.

[TheGreatPretender]

The little boy on the cover of BC&SL is the son of the little girl on I&W. Mystery solved!

[fllnsprrw]

Not quite. Who's the daddy? 

[wolven74]

I like the symbol being the only thing on the cover. I hope the logo is just a slipcase for the standard disc. If they printed the logo on the standard but didn't on the others, I would feel cheated if I bought the standard.

[Lucidity]

Not quite. Who's the daddy? 

Change of Seasons kid! 

[Tis BOOLsheet]

Not quite. Who's the daddy? 

The count of Tuscany 

[Edson Wilton]

More artwork being revealed this weekend! Calling Batman!!!!