Your Controversial Opinions on DT

[Zook]

He should turn the gain knob counter-clockwise a bit. A generous bit.

I actually think the main reason why he uses so much gain and delay/reverb/wah nowadays (especially live) is to cover up sloppiness. His playing has steadily become less accurate over the years and by using gain/effects he can hide this to some extent.

He had that brace on his hand in the Chaos in Progress Documentary. Could the sloppiness (haven't heard any) be from whatever problem he has with his hand?

[In The Name Of Rudess]

He should turn the gain knob counter-clockwise a bit. A generous bit.

I actually think the main reason why he uses so much gain and delay/reverb/wah nowadays (especially live) is to cover up sloppiness. His playing has steadily become less accurate over the years and by using gain/effects he can hide this to some extent.

He had that brace on his hand in the Chaos in Progress Documentary. Could the sloppiness (haven't heard any) be from whatever problem he has with his hand?

I guess yes, if he has tendonitis/carpal tunnel/another medical issue then that could impact his playing. It could also be that he now spends more time on other things, like composing/producing/family etc., I don't know. I'm not saying his playing is always sloppy, it's just that I've noticed that the fast alternate picking/sweep picking stuff and other difficult parts are now less accurate than they used to be in the TOT era for example, and I think this is (at least one of) the reasons why he uses more gain/effects.

[aprilethereal]

I should pick up the new Tesseract, I suppose. I somewhat lost interest after Dan left.

I don't own One (yet), but from the songs off of it I've heard, I think Altered State totally kills it.

[rumborak]

I know I'm in the stark minority on this one, but I wish DT did 2 hour shows with an opening act instead of 3 hours of DT.

[TAC]

I know I'm in the stark minority on this one, but I wish DT did 2 hour shows with an opening act instead of 3 hours of DT.

Why is that?

[rumborak]

Honestly, I zone out. Simple as that. And, if that other thread is to be believed, James has a hard time staying consistent under that kind of strain.
And, well-chosen opening bands can make a concert all the more interesting. I discovered Spock's Beard as an opener to DT back in the day.

[TAC]

Honestly, I zone out. Simple as that. And, if that other thread is to be believed, James has a hard time staying consistent under that kind of strain.
And, well-chosen opening bands can make a concert all the more interesting. I discovered Spock's Beard as an opener to DT back in the day.

I hear ya.

I discovered DT as an opener!

[Viking of the Sagas]

...in your opinion.

...in your opinion.

[TheGreatPretender]

Honestly, I zone out. Simple as that. And, if that other thread is to be believed, James has a hard time staying consistent under that kind of strain.
And, well-chosen opening bands can make a concert all the more interesting. I discovered Spock's Beard as an opener to DT back in the day.

Well, if you discovered Spock's beard that way, that's pretty cool. But when RR pushes metalcore bands to open for DT... Yeah, no, I'd much rather not have an opening band at all, than to have Trivium open for them. Sure, Trivium is far from the worst of its kind, but it still wasn't a very fitting band to open for someone like DT.

[KevShmev]

DT doing 3-hour shows again is one of the main reasons why I am traveling to other cities to see them for the first time in a decade.

[puppyonacid]

On JPs sloppiness......I actually think the opposite. There are passages he nails with more proficiency these days. Like that fast unison at the end of the Fatal Tragedy solo. He fluffs that on Scenes from NY. I think the too much gain and effects things is just a matter of JP over indulging. I much prefer his live tone circa '92/93.

[puppyonacid]

And I also discovered Spocks Beard as an opener as well as Porcupine Tree who I think opened at the back end of the same tour IIRC.

Frost* opening for DT was also a highlight.

[Prog Snob]

1.  I think that adding FAS was a waste of disc space. Not that it is a bad song, but if they are just going to use an intro tape for it, why bother?  I would have rather had another full length song.

2. I think the guitar parts on On The Backs Of Angels are better than it's predecessor Pull Me Under.

[BlobVanDam]

1.  I think that adding FAS was a waste of disc space. Not that it is a bad song, but if they are just going to use an intro tape for it, why bother?  I would have rather had another full length song.

Because it sounds cool and so people can enjoy it? Why shouldn't they include it? Just because it wasn't intended to be played, doesn't mean the music doesn't merit being on an album and heard.
And excluding it wouldn't necessarily mean you'd get another song in its place. After all, the album isn't a full disc as it is, so it's not like it bumped off any potential songs.

[Prog Snob]

Yes, Mike Portnoy, songs that are included on CDs should be played live regardless of the reason not to. They could have just included FAS on the live release later on if people wanted to hear it that badly.

[jakepriest]

Yes, Mike Portnoy, songs that are included on CDs should be played live regardless of the reason not to. They could have just included FAS on the live release later on if people wanted to hear it that badly.

I'm pretty sure it's the band's decision what they include on an album and what they don't. Also I enjoy FAS being on the album.

[Prog Snob]

Yes, Mike Portnoy, songs that are included on CDs should be played live regardless of the reason not to. They could have just included FAS on the live release later on if people wanted to hear it that badly.

I'm pretty sure it's the band's decision what they include on an album and what they don't. Also I enjoy FAS being on the album.

Why wouldn't it be the bands decision?  Isn't that kind of obvious?  I just disagree with including a short piece for which they are using an intro tape live. 

[Sycsa]

1.  I think that adding FAS was a waste of disc space. Not that it is a bad song, but if they are just going to use an intro tape for it, why bother?  I would have rather had another full length song.

People being familiar with FAS before going to a show gives it an incredibly larger impact.

2. I think the guitar parts on On The Backs Of Angels are better than it's predecessor Pull Me Under.

Two controversial opinions in one.

[The Stray Seed]

Controversial opinions from last night show:

Lie has the best chorus of Dream Theater discography. I thought this as I was singing "Don't tell meeeeeeeeeeeeeeee" together with the whole venue. Also, it's one of the best songs to hear in a live setting. I was in awe.

[?]

Controversial opinions from last night show:

Lie has the best chorus of Dream Theater discography. I thought this as I was singing "Don't tell meeeeeeeeeeeeeeee" together with the whole venue. Also, it's one of the best songs to hear in a live setting. I was in awe.

I wouldn't say it's their best chorus ever, but it's definitely kickass (just like the whole song)

[Prog Snob]

1.  I think that adding FAS was a waste of disc space. Not that it is a bad song, but if they are just going to use an intro tape for it, why bother?  I would have rather had another full length song.

People being familiar with FAS before going to a show gives it an incredibly larger impact.

2. I think the guitar parts on On The Backs Of Angels are better than it's predecessor Pull Me Under.

Two controversial opinions in one.

Firstly, I agree that the song would make a larger impact after hearing it previously.  My point is - play the damn thing yourselves then.      

Second, While it's not as blatantly obvious as LNF, there is enough to make a basic comparison.

[KevShmev]

Yes, Mike Portnoy, songs that are included on CDs should be played live regardless of the reason not to. They could have just included FAS on the live release later on if people wanted to hear it that badly.

I'm pretty sure it's the band's decision what they include on an album and what they don't. Also I enjoy FAS being on the album.

Why wouldn't it be the bands decision?  Isn't that kind of obvious?  I just disagree with including a short piece for which they are using an intro tape live.

That's fine for you to think that way, but I think it goes without saying that you are missing the point of the song.  I am not even that big a fan of it, but the point of it is more than obvious.

[TheGreatPretender]

1.  I think that adding FAS was a waste of disc space. Not that it is a bad song, but if they are just going to use an intro tape for it, why bother?  I would have rather had another full length song.

I don't see how it's a waste of disc space. They still had room on the disc for another 10 minute song, but they didn't use it because they deemed that the album was long enough as it was. So it's not like they had to shelf another song just to fit FAS into the album.

[Sycsa]

Firstly, I agree that the song would make a larger impact after hearing it previously.  My point is - play the damn thing yourselves then.   

But what then what would the open the show with? They wanted their own opener, they wanted people to know it, it's short and it fits the album perfectly. You could make a similar case for the band leaving off the orchestra section of IT btw.

Second, While it's not as blatantly obvious as LNF, there is enough to make a basic comparison.

Regarding the beginning, definitely, the structure and the arrangement are quite similar and you could say the buildup and the bass break resembles "watch the sparrow falling". While I still wouldn't call it predecessor, we're actually in agreement, I just found it funny to point out the amount of possible controversy in your post. I really like the guitar parts as well, if I were a guitar player, I'd definitely want to learn it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xD7ArwmkAz4.

[Prog Snob]

Yes, Mike Portnoy, songs that are included on CDs should be played live regardless of the reason not to. They could have just included FAS on the live release later on if people wanted to hear it that badly.

I'm pretty sure it's the band's decision what they include on an album and what they don't. Also I enjoy FAS being on the album.

Why wouldn't it be the bands decision?  Isn't that kind of obvious?  I just disagree with including a short piece for which they are using an intro tape live.

That's fine for you to think that way, but I think it goes without saying that you are missing the point of the song.  I am not even that big a fan of it, but the point of it is more than obvious.

I do remember JP saying in an interview that they wanted a to write an intro that they could use live, instead of using songs from movie soundtracks, etc.  I get the point of it. I just don't agree with them using a tape instead of playing it themselves. I can't believe I'm the only one who wouldn't rather see them play it themselves.

1.  I think that adding FAS was a waste of disc space. Not that it is a bad song, but if they are just going to use an intro tape for it, why bother?  I would have rather had another full length song.

I don't see how it's a waste of disc space. They still had room on the disc for another 10 minute song, but they didn't use it because they deemed that the album was long enough as it was. So it's not like they had to shelf another song just to fit FAS into the album.

Maybe, maybe not.  If they would have freed up some space, they could have done another 5 or 6 minute song. 

Firstly, I agree that the song would make a larger impact after hearing it previously.  My point is - play the damn thing yourselves then.   

But what then what would the open the show with? They wanted their own opener, they wanted people to know it, it's short and it fits the album perfectly. You could make a similar case for the band leaving off the orchestra section of IT btw.

Second, While it's not as blatantly obvious as LNF, there is enough to make a basic comparison.

Regarding the beginning, definitely, the structure and the arrangement are quite similar and you could say the buildup and the bass break resembles "watch the sparrow falling". While I still wouldn't call it predecessor, we're actually in agreement, I just found it funny to point out the amount of possible controversy in your post. I really like the guitar parts as well, if I were a guitar player, I'd definitely want to learn it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xD7ArwmkAz4.

I don't agree with doing the middle of IT with a tape either.  Don't get me wrong, I love FAS. It would just be nice to seem them come out  and play it like they did with Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

Exactly - I think JP's rhythms and riffs in that song trump PMU's by a landslide.

[TheGreatPretender]

Maybe, maybe not.  If they would have freed up some space, they could have done another 5 or 6 minute song.

It's a 70 minute album as  it is. They could have easily fit another 5 or 6 minute song onto it. If they were particularly compelled to write another one, I'm sure they would have. I don't see how FAS even factors into that.

[Prog Snob]

Maybe, maybe not.  If they would have freed up some space, they could have done another 5 or 6 minute song.

It's a 70 minute album as  it is. They could have easily fit another 5 or 6 minute song onto it. If they were particularly compelled to write another one, I'm sure they would have. I don't see how FAS even factors into that.

They didn't want to deliberately just fill the CD to the max so they were conscious of writing shorter songs.  If you take away FAS which is just shy of the 3 minute mark, and added another 5 minute song, they still would have been at about the 70 minute mark since the album comes it at about 68 minutes. Either way, I would have rather had a full song than a short instrumental piece that they aren't even playing themselves live. 

[TheGreatPretender]

I still don't see a difference. Sure, they didn't want to jam pack the CD, but that also means they wrote the amount of songs that they felt was appropriate. Even if FAS wasn't on the album, that doesn't mean there'd be a different song on it. For all we know, they would've extended a few of the other songs and just made 3 of them a minute longer, or just extended Illumination Theory. There's absolutely no reason to believe that if they decided not to put FAS on the album, that we'd have another song.

The fact that they're not actually playing it live is a little disappointing, but if anything, I'd say that means they could easily omit it from the live DVD if they wanted to, but certainly not from the album.

[Prog Snob]

While I agree that one shouldn't assume that DT would have added an extra song if they omitted FAS, it's just as implausible to assume that they wouldn't add an extra song.

[rumborak]

There was some interview with either JP or JR where it was alluded to that they kept track of the total amount of audio time. Some part of the album was created from the realization that there was still time left on the CD.

[TheGreatPretender]

While I agree that one shouldn't assume that DT would have added an extra song if they omitted FAS, it's just as implausible to assume that they wouldn't add an extra song.

I still don't see how the fact that they're not playing it live, has anything to do whether it should or shouldn't be on the album.
If they're not even playing it live, and it wasn't on the actual album, then all we'd get is a recording of it during the intro of the DVD, which would seem pretty pointless to me. If a song isn't being played live, then we might as well enjoy a professional, studio version of it, rather than a live playback of that studio version.

There was some interview with either JP or JR where it was alluded to that they kept track of the total amount of audio time. Some part of the album was created from the realization that there was still time left on the CD.

The easter egg, I would guess.

[Prog Snob]

While I agree that one shouldn't assume that DT would have added an extra song if they omitted FAS, it's just as implausible to assume that they wouldn't add an extra song.

I still don't see how the fact that they're not playing it live, has anything to do whether it should or shouldn't be on the album.
If they're not even playing it live, and it wasn't on the actual album, then all we'd get is a recording of it during the intro of the DVD, which would seem pretty pointless to me. If a song isn't being played live, then we might as well enjoy a professional, studio version of it, rather than a live playback of that studio version.

It's my personal opinion.  Maybe you're just not seeing it the way I am. Personally, I think if they recorded a song then there is no reason for them to not play it themselves.  To me, just playing it as an intro tape isn't what I would expect from them.

[TheGreatPretender]

It's my personal opinion.  Maybe you're just not seeing it the way I am. Personally, I think if they recorded a song then there is no reason for them to not play it themselves.  To me, just playing it as an intro tape isn't what I would expect from them.

I agree with you, but that doesn't mean that we should miss out on it on the actual album.

[Prog Snob]

It's my personal opinion.  Maybe you're just not seeing it the way I am. Personally, I think if they recorded a song then there is no reason for them to not play it themselves.  To me, just playing it as an intro tape isn't what I would expect from them.

I agree with you, but that doesn't mean that we should miss out on it on the actual album.

Keep it on the album and play it live themselves and I'll be happy. 

[Perpetual Change]

I think the whole FAS debate hits at my larger, more comprehensive controversial opinion.

First, my controverisal theory, which is the premise behind my controversial opinion: Ever since the band started self-producing, they've been under the impression that every song they record during a given album session deserves to be on that album.

Now, for the opinion: This has lead overall to less consistently good albums, and more albums with throwaway tracks. For something like "False Awakening Suite", I guess it's cool on the live intro tape, but did we really need it on an album that (I think) is already too long? Does it add value to the album? Would it have been better rolled out live, and then maybe released on a live album? My opinion is"No, No, Yes", respectively, but it doesn't matter - DT wrote FAS while they were recording DT12, so of course, they're going to include it.

DT just doesn't seem to believe that any of their songs should be left on the cutting room floor. To me, that's frustrating, but I totally respect and understand that some fans love DT's approach. For better  or worse, they pile it all on the plate every single time, and while I'd prefer shorter and more concise albums, I can see why other fans love that DT put everything on the table.