Which Side of Dream Theater do You Connect Most With?

[Madman Shepherd]

Definitely the metal side. First heard them in the mid 90s but a friend played the proggier stuff so it didn't connect. Then heard them again with SFAM and really dug some of the riffs but got bored really fast with what I deemed at the time "showing off." But the riffs and melodies were so good I kept coming back until the "showing off" made more sense. I also struggled with the songs in major keys. I always dug the minor stuff. Now I appreciate it all and DT was a gateway into the proggier stuff like early Genesis.

[Herrick]

If "both prog and metal" were an option, that's what I'd pick, but I voted for prog.  TAC's comments are pretty close to my feelings, except that I'm into a lot of the listed bands.

I understand the question but the appeal for me lies in the combination of the heavy and soft, the metal and the progressive. It's what makes Dream Theater Dream Theater.

Agreed. I was (and still am) into Thrash and Death Metal when I discovered Dream Theater in 2001. But the first band I ever really got into was Queen. I loved (and still love) Queen and I loved the Yes & Jethro Tull songs I heard on the radio in 2000. I bought a few Tull albums then but I didn't really get into Yes until the mid to late 2000s. I was also a big fan of the long Metallica and Iron Maiden epics. So an amazing singer fused with Metal and Prog at the molecular-genetic level was the perfect combination to tickle my pickle.

In conclusion: I can not vote on this poll. May Crom have mercy on my soul.

[Herrick]

If "both prog and metal" were an option, that's what I'd pick, but I voted for prog.  TAC's comments are pretty close to my feelings, except that I'm into a lot of the listed bands.

I understand the question but the appeal for me lies in the combination of the heavy and soft, the metal and the progressive. It's what makes Dream Theater Dream Theater.

Agreed. I was (and still am) into Thrash and Death Metal when I discovered Dream Theater in 2001. I am a big fan of the heavy, technical and aggressive attributes of that style of music. But the first band I ever really got into was Queen. I loved (and still love) Queen and I loved the Yes & Jethro Tull songs I heard on the radio in 2000. I bought a few Tull albums then but I didn't really get into Yes until the mid to late 2000s. I was also a big fan of the long Metallica and Iron Maiden epics. So an amazing singer fused with Metal and Prog at the molecular-genetic level was the perfect combination to tickle my pickle.

In conclusion: I can not vote on this poll. May Crom have mercy on my soul.

[Volante99]

I'd go with prog. I don't like how that gets lumped in with orchestral or "epic", though.

My definition of prog may be a bit different. To me, being progressive is less about "sounding like" classic Yes, Rush, or Porcupine Tree etc and more about pushing the boundaries, creating their own unique sound and exploration. Not to be a downer, but I'm not sure if they've really done that since SDOIT, maybe Octavarium. Not to say they haven't had great output since then, they've just settled into a specific sound, and are less "progressive" in a sense. Example, D/T  is a great album but it's not genre defining or radical as I&W, Awake, or SFaM were in the 90s.

(That said, and to contradict myself previous point, The Astonishing was pretty damn progressive, I'm just not a fan of that album haha)

[Herrick]

I'd go with prog. I don't like how that gets lumped in with orchestral or "epic", though.

My definition of prog may be a bit different. To me, being progressive is less about "sounding like" classic Yes, Rush, or Porcupine Tree etc and more about pushing the boundaries, creating their own unique sound and exploration. Not to be a downer, but I'm not sure if they've really done that since SDOIT, maybe Octavarium. Not to say they haven't had great output since then, they've just settled into a specific sound, and are less "progressive" in a sense. Example, D/T  is a great album but it's not genre defining or radical as say I&W, Awake, or SFaM were in the 90s.

(That said, and to contradict myself previous point, The Astonishing was pretty damn progressive, I'm just not a fan of that album haha)

I think they have created their own unique sound but I agree they haven't created a new unique sound. At this point in their career they won't be doing that. That is for the younger bands.

[Dedalus]

But it is not necessary to create a completely unique sound to be progressive.

Otherwise Neal Morse is no longer a progressive rocker. 

[TheGreatPretender]

Not that the whole "what defines progressive music" conversation hasn't been done to death. But I did read a very adequate description that I think resolves the issue pretty well:

When it comes to the word Prog, or the word Progressive, if you're talking about innovation in music, doing something new, then Progressive is an adjective, but if you're talking about the genre, and all the elements that it has established since the 70s with bands like King Crimson, Rush, and Genesis, then Progressive becomes a noun, just like Thrash, or Glam, or any other noun that precedes a subgenre of music. And it makes sense, when people say, "This music isn't really progressive," they're thinking about the definition of the word, which is an adjective, that actively describes the music. But as a genre, usually music isn't described with adjectives. It's not Dying Metal, or Killing Metal, it's Death Metal, that sort of thing.
That's why I think, when people actually make the distinction between "Prog" and "Progressive", and someone says, "But Prog is just short for Progressive, it's still progressive," neither is wrong, it's just that, the way the term is used, it's between a noun and an adjective. And DT has been both, they've always stayed Progressive as a noun, using the elements that have been established by those classic bands like Rush and Yes, but they've also innovated quite a lot throughout the years. And maybe they don't innovate as much these days, but as a noun, they're still very much Progressive Metal.

[Anguyen92]

I went with Metal/Hard Rock, but with some reservations.  I feel like them going heavy and dark can work really well like in Awake, but sometimes, going too "balls to the walls" in stuff like Train of Thought (which I still like the album) or some of the stuff they did in the 00s is just too much for me to take as a guy that enjoys mainstream Active Rock stuff more than the metal stuff you would hear on Sirius XM.  I think that's another reason why I enjoy DT12 along with Awake out of the batch.  It feels like those albums has that solid mixture, to me, of progressive, heavy, ballady, and make it so seamless.  Still have yet to listen to Distance Over Time though, and I got around four days to get it done to get ready for the show in LA.

[Lethean]

If "both prog and metal" were an option, that's what I'd pick, but I voted for prog. 

The bolded for me.  I'll probably vote for prog as well... but prog and metal aren't mutually exclusive for me.  DT is both, and that's a big part of why I love them so much.  I suppose I like more metal bands than prog rock bands, so maybe I should vote for metal, and yet.  I dunno.  If what you mean by metal is "day after day and night after night" then no. 

[darkshade]

Chose Progressive, but I like all sides of the band when it's good.

I think the adjective argument is correct, Dream Theater used to be progressive, now they are just Progressive.