Your Controversial Opinions on DT

[KevShmev]

I think, for a lot of people, ripping JLB's voice is an easy out, since many would never listen to music that busy/complicated anyway, so making fun of the singer is their easy way to get out of a friend bugging them about listening anymore.  I am not saying they didn't not like his voice, just that that is the easy thing to point to when you hear something and think, "Geez, I will never listen to that again unless forced to."

Besides, the argument could easily be made that DT never hits it big in '92 with Pull Me Under without JLB, so without him, they arguably never become nearly as popular as they are now.

[Prog Snob]

Agreed with Blob and Tick.  I see no reason to believe that DT could have been any more successful with a different vocalist.

Well, look at Prog Snob and I. Both of us really didn't like James' voice. I personally stuck with them because I liked the music too much, but a lot of people I have spoken to have said verbatim "the music is pretty cool. But the singer, sorry."

And again, playing weird music doesn't immediately mean you're confined to a tiny segment of listeners. Radiohead again being the prime example.

Oh...I always liked his voice.  I've always been a fan of the operatic vocals. I can understand why a lot of people don't, however. A good example of me not being able to stomach a band because of the singer was Watchtower. 

[TheGreatPretender]

James has a unique voice that's not quite as accessible as someone like Freddie Mercury, but yeah, like everyone said, you can't just say that's the only reason. I'm sorry, but JLB's voice is still a ton more accessible than Geddy Lee, and Rush were a popular mainstream band for quite a while. And like Kev mentioned, Pull Me Under WAS a hit, and people didn't seem to have a problem with his voice on that.

[Tick]

Personally I appreciate James LaBrie cause if Dream Theater had a singer doing Opeth type vocals I would not be a fan and I would not listen to them.

[Sycsa]

I couldn't get into JLB for 6 years, than BOOM, favorite singer of all time.

I remember I bought two DVDs in 2005: Deep Purple - Live in Concert 72/73 and DT - Live at Budokan. The first one because I was absolutely crazy about DP, the second one because my piano teacher recommended it with a passion. Watching them back to back left me with the impression that they were somewhat similar from a certain point of view. Both featured some of the most amazing, virtuoso musicians I ever saw at the time. Except for Glover, since his bass was way out of tune and James, since his voice sucked and he seemed out of place. I remember thinking "why can't DT get their own Gillan?" Anyway, that was my thought process back then, as kid. Funny how our tastes evolve.

[bosk1]

Not really controversial, but I think DT would sound even better if they incorporated more straight-ahead rock n roll beats, riffs, and solos into the instrumental sections.

I was right there with you right up until that part where you opened your mouth and words came out.

[TheGreatPretender]

I couldn't get into JLB for 6 years, than BOOM, favorite singer of all time.

6 months for me, but yeah, same deal. Honestly, when first hearing DT's music, I had a hard time picturing this singer. I mean, his voice is so unique and young sounding that I wasn't sure whether to picture some punk rocker kid, or some khaki wearing Joe Schmoe. And I think actually seeing what he looks like and hearing how he spoke helped me to get into his vocals. It was on the SC Documentary DVD, and I just thought he looked so badass in it, I was like, "Man, this dude's cool!" Once I knew who to picture behind the voice, I started to understand and appreciate it a lot more.

[rumborak]

Personally I appreciate James LaBrie cause if Dream Theater had a singer doing Opeth type vocals I would not be a fan and I would not listen to them.

Really? Total opposite for me. Steven Wilson. Mikael Akerfeldt or Ben Folds any day for me. JLB-style operatic singing, that's where it gets dicey.

[Ben_Jamin]

JLB isn't that consistant of a singer, and has a really raspy nasalish voice tone. I don't mind it and prefer his more softer warmer lower register better than his high vocals,  because high vocals are over-rated.

PoW is the best song off SC. TMOLS has the worst intro, but is a great song.

UaGM has meaningless lyrics with too much abstract imagery....who knows what that song is about?

Raw Dog would've kicked ass live transitioning from These Walls.

[Daybreak at the lake]

I think Change of Seasons is boring. Could never get it into it.

Dream Theater only has two flawless albums (I&W, and SFAM).

[Nel]

Once, I had Dream Theater on shuffle, and after The Dance Of Eternity was The Ministry Of Lost Souls. Now, usually songs that transition into other songs don't work well on shuffle, but this was one of those weird cases where the way TDoE ends, it leads into TMoLS almost perfectly. o_O

[TheGreatPretender]

Dream Theater only has two flawless albums (I&W, and SFAM).

I'd agree with that statement.

Once, I had Dream Theater on shuffle, and after The Dance Of Eternity was The Ministry Of Lost Souls. Now, usually songs that transition into other songs don't work well on shuffle, but this was one of those weird cases where the way TDoE ends, it leads into TMoLS almost perfectly. o_O

Very interesting. I shall give this a try.

[Sycsa]

Dream Theater only has two flawless albums (I&W, and SFAM).

That's not a controversial opinion in my book. Although SFAM is indeed flawless, it's the only album (besides DT12) that I always listen to in its entirety and never feel compelled to skip a song. I&W has Another Day which is butchered by the cheesy '80s romantic sax, Awake has that ugly, overly distorted guitar tone which especially bothers me in The Mirror & Lie.

[Ben_Jamin]

Once, I had Dream Theater on shuffle, and after The Dance Of Eternity was The Ministry Of Lost Souls. Now, usually songs that transition into other songs don't work well on shuffle, but this was one of those weird cases where the way TDoE ends, it leads into TMoLS almost perfectly. o_O

That's never happened to me...I must try now.

[TheGreatPretender]

Dream Theater only has two flawless albums (I&W, and SFAM).

That's not a controversial opinion in my book. Although SFAM is indeed flawless, it's the only album (besides DT12) that I always listen to in its entirety and never feel compelled to skip a song. I&W has Another Day which is butchered by the cheesy '80s romantic sax, Awake has that ugly, overly distorted guitar tone which especially bothers me in The Mirror & Lie.

Actually yeah, now that you mention it, DT12 is definitely up there with being an incredibly consistent and flawless album. Musically, it probably won't reach the heights of SFAM and I&W for me, but as far as the actual songs not having any flaws in them, that's definitely another one.

[Outcrier]

  For me, DT12 already start flawed (FAS).

[Lucidity]

UaGM has meaningless lyrics with too much abstract imagery....who knows what that song is about?

Glad someone agrees with me on this.

[BlobVanDam]

Personally I appreciate James LaBrie cause if Dream Theater had a singer doing Opeth type vocals I would not be a fan and I would not listen to them.

Really? Total opposite for me. Steven Wilson. Mikael Akerfeldt or Ben Folds any day for me. JLB-style operatic singing, that's where it gets dicey.

Each to their own. When I hear voices like that, I instantly stop listening (I excuse Opeth because they (used to) have growls too).
Nothing is more of a dealbreaker in music to me than a soft singer with a low range. I'll take IaW era JLB all day every day!

[rumborak]

Interesting. For me what makes a good voice is determined at least half of it by the timbre, expression of it. That's why I love for example Peter Gabriel's singing, even though the guy has almost no range. James has amazing range, but I always felt he had to kinda compensate for his lack of timbre with doing this additional stuff, e.g. the breaths, the wailing etc.

[?]

These days I prefer a more "normal" mid-range vocal style to operatic singing, but James is still one of my favorite vocalists.

[TheGreatPretender]

Interesting. For me what makes a good voice is determined at least half of it by the timbre, expression of it. That's why I love for example Peter Gabriel's singing, even though the guy has almost no range. James has amazing range, but I always felt he had to kinda compensate for his lack of timbre with doing this additional stuff, e.g. the breaths, the wailing etc.

Err... Lack of timbre? I didn't realize there was such a thing. Timbre is basically the quality of the sound, and I mean, if you don't like it, that's fine. James' timbre is very unique and not something that's necessarily immediately easy to appreciate, but it's still a certain kind of timbre. There's no lack of it.

[Prog Snob]

Interesting. For me what makes a good voice is determined at least half of it by the timbre, expression of it. That's why I love for example Peter Gabriel's singing, even though the guy has almost no range. James has amazing range, but I always felt he had to kinda compensate for his lack of timbre with doing this additional stuff, e.g. the breaths, the wailing etc.

Err... Lack of timbre? I didn't realize there was such a thing. Timbre is basically the quality of the sound, and I mean, if you don't like it, that's fine. James' timbre is very unique and not something that's necessarily immediately easy to appreciate, but it's still a certain kind of timbre. There's no lack of it.

Agreed.  James singing an F# would have a different timbre than Jordan playing an F#.

[TheGreatPretender]

In fact, if I had to imagine what a lack of timbre sounds like, I'd probably say that a sine wave is something that exemplifies a lack of timbre. Now, if James' voice had the quality of a synthesizer, I'm sure DT would be a hell of a lot more popular, because that would be kinda cool and weird, but yeah, it he has a particular quality, so there's no lack of timbre there.

[Tick]

As crazy as it sounds I think that even after only 2 albums it would be hard to replace Mike Mangini with anyone else. He has left a mark.

The exception being Mike Portnoy coming back.

[rumborak]

Interesting. For me what makes a good voice is determined at least half of it by the timbre, expression of it. That's why I love for example Peter Gabriel's singing, even though the guy has almost no range. James has amazing range, but I always felt he had to kinda compensate for his lack of timbre with doing this additional stuff, e.g. the breaths, the wailing etc.

Err... Lack of timbre? I didn't realize there was such a thing. Timbre is basically the quality of the sound, and I mean, if you don't like it, that's fine. James' timbre is very unique and not something that's necessarily immediately easy to appreciate, but it's still a certain kind of timbre. There's no lack of it.

Call it timbre, overtones, jenesaisquois, whatever. I'm talking about the basic quality of a person's voice, and there I just find James lacking.

[SeRoX]

Don't get it. I mean, even DT fans who don't like James' voice so much they agree on one thing that James's voice is one of the unique voice out there. I can understand if ones are not liking it but saying that he lacks of its quality? Don't know.

[BlobVanDam]

Interesting. For me what makes a good voice is determined at least half of it by the timbre, expression of it. That's why I love for example Peter Gabriel's singing, even though the guy has almost no range. James has amazing range, but I always felt he had to kinda compensate for his lack of timbre with doing this additional stuff, e.g. the breaths, the wailing etc.

I feel the same about the guys you mentioned.
I love JLB's tone, especially on the older albums. The guys you mentioned have a pretty much run of the mill timbre to me.

[Crow]

Random thought. TSCO is probably the best song on SFAM. And SFAM has a few really good songs on it, so.

[Madman Shepherd]

As long as we're being controversial I think TSCO is one of DT's worst songs.  I guess I shouldn't say "worst" because it doesn't really make me cringe, but I think it is kinda cheesy. 

I also think the Dance of Eternity is pretty bad.  I mean, crazy times signatures and wailing and blah blah.  I'll take Enigma Machine over that any day. 

[BlobVanDam]

Random thought. TSCO is probably the best song on SFAM. And SFAM has a few really good songs on it, so.

As an individual song, I think it's definitely one of the best on the album. In the context of the album though, there are others that work better.

As long as we're being controversial I think TSCO is one of DT's worst songs.  I guess I shouldn't say "worst" because it doesn't really make me cringe, but I think it is kinda cheesy. 

I also think the Dance of Eternity is pretty bad.  I mean, crazy times signatures and wailing and blah blah.  I'll take Enigma Machine over that any day. 

Enigma Machine is fun, but it's easily my least favourite DT instrumental. It's all riff, riff, solo, solo, solo, riff, riff. TDOE has more variety and is more interesting imo, and the ragtime is one of my favourite DT moments ever. Haters gonna hate!

[Crow]

Random thought. TSCO is probably the best song on SFAM. And SFAM has a few really good songs on it, so.

As an individual song, I think it's definitely one of the best on the album. In the context of the album though, there are others that work better.

Yeah that's fair enough, that's the problem with SFAM, it's really strong as an album but not as strong on a song-by-song basis, still easily #3 in their discog though

[BlobVanDam]

Random thought. TSCO is probably the best song on SFAM. And SFAM has a few really good songs on it, so.

As an individual song, I think it's definitely one of the best on the album. In the context of the album though, there are others that work better.

Yeah that's fair enough, that's the problem with SFAM, it's really strong as an album but not as strong on a song-by-song basis, still easily #3 in their discog though

It's #2 for me, but for that reason, I always understand when people don't regard it as highly as I do. It is definitely greater than the sum of its parts, with every song written to serve its role in the album as a whole piece, rather than meant to knock your socks off as a standalone track.
And for that reason, I never listen to tracks individually. I rarely have, and can't even remember the last time I did. It's an album that needs to be listened to and appreciated as a whole. That is the double edged sword that is the concept album, I suppose.

[Tick]

As crazy as it sounds I think that even after only 2 albums it would be hard to replace Mike Mangini with anyone else. He has left a mark.

The exception being Mike Portnoy coming back.

Well I guess everone agrees? Good!

[TheGreatPretender]

It's #2 for me, but for that reason, I always understand when people don't regard it as highly as I do. It is definitely greater than the sum of its parts, with every song written to serve its role in the album as a whole piece, rather than meant to knock your socks off as a standalone track.
And for that reason, I never listen to tracks individually. I rarely have, and can't even remember the last time I did. It's an album that needs to be listened to and appreciated as a whole. That is the double edged sword that is the concept album, I suppose.

I think that's only really the case if you care about the lyrics. But musically, I think the vast majority of SFAM is solid on its own. I mean, obviously there are songs like Regression and Through My Words that serve better as lead ins into the following songs, but pretty much everything else on the album is musically awesome even on its own. And if you break it down into moments, it pretty much has no bad moments, aside from maybe the overindulgent sex/gambling breakdown on Home. But aside from that, every moment of music on the album is sheer pleasure to the ears, and a lot of them hold up extremely well on their own merits. Especially the two ballads.

[BlobVanDam]

It's #2 for me, but for that reason, I always understand when people don't regard it as highly as I do. It is definitely greater than the sum of its parts, with every song written to serve its role in the album as a whole piece, rather than meant to knock your socks off as a standalone track.
And for that reason, I never listen to tracks individually. I rarely have, and can't even remember the last time I did. It's an album that needs to be listened to and appreciated as a whole. That is the double edged sword that is the concept album, I suppose.

I think that's only really the case if you care about the lyrics. But musically, I think the vast majority of SFAM is solid on its own. I mean, obviously there are songs like Regression and Through My Words that serve better as lead ins into the following songs, but pretty much everything else on the album is musically awesome even on its own. And if you break it down into moments, it pretty much has no bad moments, aside from maybe the overindulgent sex/gambling breakdown on Home. But aside from that, every moment of music on the album is sheer pleasure to the ears, and a lot of them hold up extremely well on their own merits. Especially the two ballads.

You're right, but the first half of the album especially is really designed to run together as part of the album, hence why people rank them together and cop my rage.

A lot of people don't count Regression because it's just an intro to the album, and can't separate Overture 1928 from Strange Deja Vu because of the segue between them, and then TMW is basically a short bridge between that and Fatal Tragedy. I can't recall seeing anybody rank Regression or TMW highly, because they're so short and really designed to be part of the album.

The second half of the album holds up well as individual songs, with tracks like BTL, THE, Home, TSCO, and Finally Free, that work perfectly fine standalone, because they have their own start/finish, rather than running on, and have enough "meat" to work separately.

But there are enough of the shorter tracks to kick off the album that I can understand why some people don't like the album as much.