DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site

Just curious what people think.  Obviously, there are a lot of things that factor into this.  25 years later, with material that is as challenging as a lot of the I&W material, virtually ANY singer would struggle and not be able to sing certain parts true to how they were recorded on the album.  Heck, the recorded versions of Another Day and Take the Time were virtually impossible to reproduce live even when James was in his prime. 

I am basically of two minds on this.  On one hand, I have no problem with them tuning down, changing melodies, adding jams and changing arrangements a bit, etc. to not only allow James to sing them all in a full set, but also to make them a bit fresh and exciting, since we've all heard most of these songs a LOT of times.  But part of me feels like, "But it's the 25th anniversary! If they are celebrating an anniversary, they need to keep it reasonably true to the originals because that is what they are celebrating!"  Ultimately, I think I fall more on the former side than the latter.  But I still can't completely shake the latter either.

So, again, just curious what others think.

I've never really wanted live concerts to be 100% faithful to the studio. I really like the surprises and twists on the source material. Plus, I don't want to see James struggle, so changing the melodies and tuning to accommodate where he's at is a good thing, IMO.

I am generally the same way.  But I could see how an "anniversary show" might feel different for some.  And for those who might feel otherwise, this isn't to bash what they are doing.  But just to comment on it as a "what if."

I wish they would presented I&W full just for the selective cities in their original tone. It could give James enough time to rest his voice and come energic again to the stage. I'm not annoyed by changing vocal melodies but still... it would definitely nice to see their original tone.

Quote from: SeRoX on April 21, 2017, 09:43:04 AM
I wish they would presented I&W full just for the selective cities in their original tone. It could give James enough time to rest his voice and come energic again to the stage. I'm not annoyed by changing vocal melodies but still... it would definitely nice to see their original tone.

So if I understand you correctly, I think you are saying:  What they are doing is cool, but it would be cool if they picked a few select cities where they tried to do a special performance that kept I&W as close to the original versions as possible.  Is that right?

I think we all need to set our expectations knowing that all singers can't do what they did early in their careers.


Now for extended jams I go back and forth on that. 

Quote from: kingshmegland on April 21, 2017, 10:01:18 AM
I think we all need to set our expectations knowing that all singers can't do what they did early in their careers.

Yes,yes,yes^^^ Look at Geddy/Plant...etc.

I've seen every tour since I&A was released and listened to every piece countless times, so I feel refreshed when I hear variants and jams...I love it!

Quote from: Podaar on April 21, 2017, 09:26:36 AM
I've never really wanted live concerts to be 100% faithful to the studio. I really like the surprises and twists on the source material. Plus, I don't want to see James struggle, so changing the melodies and tuning to accommodate where he's at is a good thing, IMO.

I voted for the variations.  I've seen with other bands where they change it too much.  I think what DT has been doing on this tour is just right so I'm good with it.

*shrugs*

It's THEIR material, so however they want to present it is OK with me.

If they play it just like the originals, great.  I get to hear one of my favorite albums of all time played live.  Awesome.

If they add other stuff to it, or make changes, great.  I'm getting something a little different than just a reproduction of the CD, which I can listen to any time.  Awesome.

My overall opinion is that the tour in itself wasn't the best idea because of the performance issues, but given the premise, I think they do what they can do. I don't mind the downtuning at all really.
If I had to point out one thing, it's that while I think it is smart for James to adjust the melodies, he's still kinda just improvising them, with mixed results. I wished he sat down with JP and worked out proper lines.

I'm fine with how they are doing it now. I think tuning the songs down and altering some melodies is totally reasonable for obviously reasons.

Also, I'm cool with the jams and adding in new sections or different ways to play different sections. It seems like a big criticism of the band since MM joined was that everything was too polished live. They played to a click with loops, there was no jamming, etc... So I like that they brought that element back.

I was perfectly fine with the way they handled. Guitars don't age, vocal chords do. What's the point in having James choke on himself every night? I also welcomed the slight variations here and there, such as the extended outros and jams. It's not that they reinvented the song, like when they covered The Number of the Beast and turned Gangland in a jazz song, you're still hearing the songs as you know it with just a ittle additional touch here and there.

Only thing that felt a bit copied and pasted was the drum solo in the middle of Metropolis. They chose a weird moment to do it, I feel there could have been better moments to place it.

I saw the show in Manchester the other night and was discussing this with my friend as we left. What I said to him at the time was that I am ok with the songs not being played exactly like they are on the album because of the simple fact that it's not 1992 anymore. This is the DT of 2017 playing the album.

10 or 15 years ago, what would often happen was that LaBrie might not hit certain notes, or certain sections would be cut entirely e.g the second verse of Take The Time. The option of playing the song in a slightly different key or singing slight variations of the melodies here and there instead seems far more mature and sensible to me than keeping the songs rigidly as they are when there is a strong chance he may not hit the required notes.

I think JLB has gotten a lot better at improvising alternative melodies recently. It sounds so much better than trying and failing to hit those really high notes, and doesn't hurt the overall performance of the song in any way. Obviously I miss the LaBrie of '92 with crazy energy who would be relentlessly belting out this ridiculous notes in every song, but like I said, time has moved on and we just need to accept that. Once we do, we can enjoy the modern representation of the music in whatever form the band chooses.

Quote from: bosk1 on April 21, 2017, 09:56:18 AM

Quote from: SeRoX on April 21, 2017, 09:43:04 AM
I wish they would presented I&W full just for the selective cities in their original tone. It could give James enough time to rest his voice and come energic again to the stage. I'm not annoyed by changing vocal melodies but still... it would definitely nice to see their original tone.

So if I understand you correctly, I think you are saying:  What they are doing is cool, but it would be cool if they picked a few select cities where they tried to do a special performance that kept I&W as close to the original versions as possible.  Is that right?

Yup that's right.

I think they should perform the album in the way that feels most comfortable for them right now. The downtuning doesn't bother me and I really like the variations and solo's they add to the songs.

If the guys had no issue playing the album faithfully, then that is how I would want to see it.  Knowing they cannot, then I am totally cool with downtuning and whatnot to make it easier for everyone.  Id rather not see them struggle with the high notes.

As for changing the actual music and whatnot, I am also cool with that.  I think that's what makes live concerts so much fun, when things aren't exactly how they are on the album.  Adding a spot from Metallica is great, I bet the crowd goes wild for that.  Extending a guitar solo, go for it!

I'm fine with them doing the alterations they have done. I actually really liked the extended jams and other stuff. Personally it was pretty surreal to even see a show celebrating an album that's older than I am. What comes to James, honestly I just want him to be comfortable and not wreck his voice trying to copy the original record note for note when it's perfectly understandable he can't

However, I am glad he still chose to hit the F in LTL. That's such a cool moment

I don't mind them tuning down or changing vocal melodies because the voice is the most delicate.  I hate when they alter parts into jam session or add little things.  WDADRU is one of my favorite official bootlegs and while the "carol of the bells" parts sounds cool, I'm thinking, WTF dude?  You've played the album 95% faithfully and then you do this.  It sounded cool but they should have saved that for another show

Add me to the list of those who prefer the variations and alterations. Very rarely has DT ever altered a song in a way that I don't like it, whether a lengthened solo, a new/changed instrumental section or completely overhauling the whole song - I love all the changes.

The reason for downtuning/changing of vocal melodies is obvious and completely understandable. But I am also happy that they're loosening up and adding the extended instrumental sections/solos/etc. I definitely don't want to see them perform the songs as closely as possible in comparison to the album. If I did, I'll just listen to the actual album, LatM/LiT or one of the early bootlegs.

The fact that they are dedicating the second set to playing the entire album in order is enough evidence of them celebrating the anniversary of the album. The performances don't have to be carbon copies of it to properly celebrate.

I prefer instruments staying true to the original version but there still will be some variations no matter what.  Especially with vocals.  It is what it is.  They can do whatever they want.

As long as it's not Karaoke James, I don't care what they do. It doesn't need to be completely exact to the original. Heck, a major complaint about the MM era is that the live reproductions are too close to the album versions.

Haven't watched any videos of performances online, so I'm not sure what they're changing, but I am an advocate for them changing things up for two reasons:

1: They are a different band now than they were in 1993. It only makes sense that they adapt the songs to fit the current band. Especially since two members weren't on the original recording and are capable of coming up with cool parts on their own.

2: If I want to listen to I&W, I can listen to the CD. When I go to a concert I like to see something at least somewhat unique.

That being said, there are certain things from that album that should be preserved for homage more than anything else. I'm thinking Kevin Moore's solo in Take the Time, the Under a Glass Moon guitar solo, and some of MP's drum parts.

If James can't hit the notes, he shouldn't try to. The reason I don't like his live voice is because he tends to shriek and shrill the high notes, and it sounds... NOT WELL.

Since I've never seen them play a single song from IaW live, I went with the first option, but I do think that the changes they have made for this tour are pretty cool.

I geniunely don't understand why someone wouldn't like some changes made to the songs, like jams, alternative solos and whatnot. What's the point of playing (or wanting to hear) a song exactly like it was recorded over and over again in perpetuum? I'd go even further, lose the click and play the songs faster, with more energy, but that won't happen.

Alright, a couple of thoughts here.

* It's really surprising that James sounded so incredible during the 2011-12 tour with many early era and difficult songs, and then again in the 2014 tour with Awake material, but then kind of took a nosedive at The Astonishing live and then this tour. There's the getting old thing sure, but I think it's some sort of fatigue that DT really needs to just take care of. Take a few months long break, get back in shape, spend some time in your home's climate and go back out there. I love the guys and I have no doubt in my mind James is doing his best but man he *sounds* a bit tired. The first thing a worldwide non-stop touring vocalist needs, before any alterations to the vocal passages, is plenty of rest and care.

* I don't mind lowering the key, I can live with melody alterations, but if you're gonna do both, please plan the melody alterations in advance. Like someone said here earlier, the results are neither here nor there and sound great in parts and in specific shows, but bad in other places.

* I really think the first couple of shows were absolutely close to the magnificent live bootleg recorded in 2007, except half a step lower. I get that there's a level of "wear" throughout the tour, but it really seems like the melody alterations are getting a bit over exaggerated as the tour goes on

Quote from: IdoSC on April 24, 2017, 12:52:32 PM
* It's really surprising that James sounded so incredible during the 2011-12 tour with many early era and difficult songs, and then again in the 2014 tour with Awake material, but then kind of took a nosedive at The Astonishing live and then this tour.

Nosedive at The Astonishing?  He was maybe the highlight of both TA shows I went to.  He struggled with some of the Nefarius parts, but otherwise was fantastic. 

Quote from: rumborak on April 21, 2017, 10:41:48 AM
If I had to point out one thing, it's that while I think it is smart for James to adjust the melodies, he's still kinda just improvising them, with mixed results. I wished he sat down with JP and worked out proper lines.

Based on the last leg, I completely agreed. But judging by the vids of this leg so far, it seems like they have done just that. And the results appear much improved. Good balance of fitting well with the original spirit of the songs and staying within James' vocal capabilities.

New user here, but a longtime fan of the band.

This is actually a really important question and speaks to the future of the band here on out when it comes to live performances. I would prefer they actually did not perform it all rather than have James perform it in the way he is at the moment. For starters they are doing the entire album tuned-down - which by itself is perhaps alright. However, James is completely changing some of the iconic vocal melodies of the songs - sometimes even dropping certain words an entire octave. This leads to a watered down performance and direction that I honestly wish the band would not take. They have an entire catalogue of brilliant music they could still perform that James would not have to struggle with that could be performed as it was originally recorded - in the proper key and with the correct vocal melodies. Again, I understand Images and Words is an iconic album, but I would prefer they just leave the past in the past than rather perform something that has clearly vocally passed James by. This is not a shot at James either. His voice is still great, it is just not comfortably in that range anymore. In fact, I think his rasp and aggressive vocals are better now than at many other points in his career. For this reason, they should focus on those type of songs and form a setlist that matches his current strengths as a vocalist.

For example... a good well rounded setlist that might not be as taxing on his voice, but still includes many classics.

Set 1:
Dark Eternal Night
The Bigger Picture
Hell's Kitchen
Solitary Shell
Through Her Eyes
Panic Attack
A Nightmare To Remember
Set 2:
In The Presence of Enemies Pt 1.
The Enemy Inside
Wither
Lost Not Forgotten
Peruvian Skies
Stream Of Conciousness
Wait For Sleep
Breaking All Illusions
Encore:
Octavarium

Now, this setlist isn't "easy" by definition for the average singer, but I could absolutely see James singing this set night in and night out with his current voice and doing a good job with the original vocal melodies and the original song keys. Ultimately, in my opinion, Dream Theater is not just a legacy touring band that rides on performing their back discography - they are still very much a band in their prime releasing great material(astonishing aside..). As a fan of their albums, and a person who has seen them many times live since 2005, I would much rather see this type of show than watch James attempt to sing Images and A Change of Seasons back to back. I would rather hear them knock out of the park a performance of A Nightmare to Remember than hear James attempt to get his way through Take The Time by ignoring every big note in the song that originally helped make the song great to begin with.

Bottom line for me is this -- if they need to tune down in order to provide James with the best scenario for him to sound his best, then they should do that. I said this in another JLB thread -- he recorded that stuff in his 20s, and he's now in his 50s. It is an incredibly difficult record to sing, and I think the guy deserves some credit, rather than criticism.

In response to those folks who would rather the band not play the album at all, I understand that point. However, I'd counter that singers struggle all the time live, even with stuff written to match their current level of vocal ability. Tuning down, even a half-step just makes it a bit easier, and frankly, doesn't muddy up the mix that bad to where it sounds terrible.

Tesla is a band that has dropped stuff ridiculously low (Edison's Medicine comes to mind) and it sounds like garbage with no dynamics. But what I have heard that Dream Theater is doing is absolutely fine to my ears.

Frankly, I think people should embrace this. Because it (a full performance of this album) will never happen again, because of the difficulty level. So tip your hat to James  :yarr and to Dream Theater, instead of tearing them down about lowering some of the songs.

I think DT's biggest problem is/was that they painted themselves into a corner. A lot of fans seem to almost have a Pavlovian response to an F#. Look at the YouTube videos where seriously the top comment is ""lol I forwarded to [F#] to see whether he could hit it". If James hits it it was a good concert, if he didn't it wasn't. Seeing this every concert, DT realized that unless their vocals are soaring high and the solos are blistering, people aren't coming. So, each album they pander to the masses and add those. And each year, James struggles more and more.

By choice or necessity, I feel DT missed the chance to mature like other bands of their kin did.

Quote from: AnybodyListening.net on April 26, 2017, 12:55:49 PM
Bottom line for me is this -- if they need to tune down in order to provide James with the best scenario for him to sound his best, then they should do that. I said this in another JLB thread -- he recorded that stuff in his 20s, and he's now in his 50s. It is an incredibly difficult record to sing, and I think the guy deserves some credit, rather than criticism.

In response to those folks who would rather the band not play the album at all, I understand that point. However, I'd counter that singers struggle all the time live, even with stuff written to match their current level of vocal ability. Tuning down, even a half-step just makes it a bit easier, and frankly, doesn't muddy up the mix that bad to where it sounds terrible.

Tesla is a band that has dropped stuff ridiculously low (Edison's Medicine comes to mind) and it sounds like garbage with no dynamics. But what I have heard that Dream Theater is doing is absolutely fine to my ears.

Frankly, I think people should embrace this. Because it (a full performance of this album) will never happen again, because of the difficulty level. So tip your hat to James  :yarr and to Dream Theater, instead of tearing them down about lowering some of the songs.

Agree with all of that, Brian.

Quote from: rumborak on April 26, 2017, 04:07:53 PM
By choice or necessity, I feel DT missed the chance to mature like other bands of their kin did.

That's an interesting thought.  Who exactly are bands of their kin?

Where were these key pressure points in DT's career? Certainly an obvious one would've been Mangini joining the band. What would Maturity look like?

Quote from: TAC on April 26, 2017, 04:14:32 PM
That's an interesting thought.  Who exactly are bands of their kin?

The obvious data point would be Rush. They had the same choice of sticking with high-pitched, anthemic rock, or go somewhere else. They went, with much consternation, the 80s pop route for a while. In the end they came out bigger than before.
Or take Opeth. They too clearly could have pandered to the existing fan base and continue their death metal, but they decided to reinvent themselves.
Steven Wilson. Easily could have ridden the Porcupine Tree gravy train, but went entirely different afterwards.

Rush did lose some of their fan base though.  They went from 15,000  to 20,000 to an average of 9,000 per show.

OK, I'm just not sure what DT could've done, and when they could've done it. I'm not arguing with you, or even disagreeing. I think the concept of what you say is interesting.

I think Rush is a whole different animal.

Opeth had no choice but to go away from death metal vocals, especially if they wanted to actually attract fans. Maybe it was legitimate, like they just didn't want to do it anymore, but to me, it seems more of a business decision, than an artistic one.

I have no idea about anything Steven Wilson related.



I just have a hard time finding a true peer of Dream Theater. To me, the only time they artistically plateaued was the SC/BC&SL era.
I also think that they could've really upped their game technically with MM, but have failed to do so.

I don't see any of those "disqualifications". Rush clearly could have treaded the 2112 ground. To this day is *the* album of theirs. Opeth, if anybody had said "what do you think of Opeth switching from death metal to 70s prog?", the answer would have been "if they want to kill the band, sure".
Same with Wilson. Porcupine Tree was filling the halls easily with their alternative metal. Going pop like he did was one hell of a ballsy move.

DT still plays the same style, essentially. Sure they evolved a bit, but  in a lot of ways they still play a variation of IAW. And 25 years later, it's just not convincing anymore. People show up for a convincing rendition of 80s DT. And James first of all, can't do that in 2017.

What type of stylistic change do you think they could have or should have attempted, and at which point in their career?

Rumbo is talking about the run of albums from I&W through Octavarium.   All slight change of styles. Always challenging themselves sonically.

I didn't think he was talking about that run. I'm not sure, actually. I didn't think I&W through 8V was the issue.

He's saying they challenged themselves to stretch out musically in those days.  Of late except for the new album they haven't.

I agree. I'm just wondering what types of changes Rumbo is thinking of. What directions could they have gone in?

The Astonishing was a huge step, and it can be argued whether it was successful or not, but I think it was quite a chance taking undertaking.

Quote from: TAC on April 26, 2017, 05:03:06 PM
What type of stylistic change do you think they could have or should have attempted, and at which point in their career?

DT is possibly *the* band who could venture into just about any musical territory, and do a good job at it. Take TA; it's all about technology vs manual music, where is JR's contribution for the electronic stuff? Or, in the early days JP would play jazz-infused solos, where have those gone? Charlie (yes, Charlie) brought pop as an influence. There were a lot of avenues for a prog outfit to go into, bit since they signed with RR, they've become mostly a regular metal band. *When* they venture into other styles it often is a joke insert, like JR's circus music, or another Metallica analogy.

My bigger point is that DT didn't deviate far from the center, and 25 years later this is now haunting them because they are still sorta expected to play 80s prog metal. Some people above say TA was a venture out, and indeed in some ways it was; but look at JLB's Nefaryus vocals. Unnecessary vocal lines that live became a big issue.

Quote from: rumborak on April 26, 2017, 05:39:23 PM
  bit since they signed with RR, they've become mostly a regular metal band. *When* they venture into other styles it often is a joke insert, like JR's circus music, or another Metallica analogy.

I think that's fair.

Quote from: rumborak on April 26, 2017, 05:39:23 PM
  but look at JLB's Nefaryus vocals. Unnecessary vocal lines that live became a big issue.

Personally, I would stand by the studio version. I think it's excellent, and I love the nod to Freddie Mercury. Even if he sand them straight live, I wouldn't care. It makes the studio version, the one that will live on, much more interesting.

Given how many times they've played each song from I&W over the course of their career, they should feel free to mix it up a bit after 25 years.

Quote from: rumborak on April 26, 2017, 04:07:53 PM
I think DT's biggest problem is/was that they painted themselves into a corner. A lot of fans seem to almost have a Pavlovian response to an F#. Look at the YouTube videos where seriously the top comment is ""lol I forwarded to [F#] to see whether he could hit it".

You know, you make a fair argument, but actually I wonder if some of this sort of thing is James-specific. He's a notoriously spotty live singer, in that a lot of people know he's capable of brilliance but also of being way off. And I find it oddly cathartic to watch him fight with his range--it's bracing. Bracing in a way that, to compare to the Tesla example earlier, there is none of with Jeff Keith. Nobody's watching Edison's Medicine live to see if he can hit the E5 at the end--he can't, and he won't try. I mean, sure, people speculatively check out vids of guys who hit high notes 25 years ago to see if they can still do it, but likely in passing and then they move on. So I wonder how much of these sort of comments have to do with the unique experience of watching James in the YouTube medium. I don't think it's a great proxy for how people approach DT live as a whole. I mean, heck, the casual fan knows DT for the guitar and drum work far more than the vocals. And further, James, 1993 live shows aside, isn't anywhere near as known for his high vocals as any number of power metal singers. I'm not saying that there's no truth in where you're going, but it's a pretty complicated issue.

Quote from: rumborak on April 26, 2017, 05:39:23 PMDT is possibly *the* band who could venture into just about any musical territory, and do a good job at it. Take TA; it's all about technology vs manual music, where is JR's contribution for the electronic stuff? Or, in the early days JP would play jazz-infused solos, where have those gone? Charlie (yes, Charlie) brought pop as an influence. There were a lot of avenues for a prog outfit to go into, bit since they signed with RR, they've become mostly a regular metal band. *When* they venture into other styles it often is a joke insert, like JR's circus music, or another Metallica analogy.

My bigger point is that DT didn't deviate far from the center, and 25 years later this is now haunting them because they are still sorta expected to play 80s prog metal. Some people above say TA was a venture out, and indeed in some ways it was; but look at JLB's Nefaryus vocals. Unnecessary vocal lines that live became a big issue.

I'm not sure how DT even remotely resembles a "regular metal band," and I don't really understand what you mean by "haunting" in this context.  I just don't agree with your overall point at all.  Yes, DT definitely could have gone a different direction with their music (moreso than the diversity they already have).  But so what?  It doesn't somehow follow that they should do so.  You can Monday-morning-quarterback the band all you want, but for every "they should do this" you can come up with, I'm pretty sure the band (and most of the fans) would respond along the lines of, "No, we don't want to do that, and there's no reason to."  Just because they haven't met your personal expectations doesn't mean that something within the band needs to be fixed.

Quote from: TAC on April 26, 2017, 04:36:46 PM
Opeth had no choice but to go away from death metal vocals, especially if they wanted to actually attract fans.

What are you talking about?

Quote from: TAC on April 26, 2017, 04:36:46 PM
Maybe it was legitimate, like they just didn't want to do it anymore, but to me, it seems more of a business decision, than an artistic one.

It's legitimate.  Akerfeldt didn't want to do that anymore.  I mean, they still play older songs in their concerts, and AFAIK he still does the death vocals on those.  But his musical interests as far as creating new music veered away from that style.

Quote from: hefdaddy42 on April 27, 2017, 06:27:39 AM

Quote from: TAC on April 26, 2017, 04:36:46 PM
Opeth had no choice but to go away from death metal vocals, especially if they wanted to actually attract fans.

What are you talking about?

Quote from: TAC on April 26, 2017, 04:36:46 PM
Maybe it was legitimate, like they just didn't want to do it anymore, but to me, it seems more of a business decision, than an artistic one.

It's legitimate.  Akerfeldt didn't want to do that anymore.  I mean, they still play older songs in their concerts, and AFAIK he still does the death vocals on those.  But his musical interests as far as creating new music veered away from that style.

I've also wondered as he got up in age, he knew how hard it would be to growl for every song.

He actually had an almost fully written death metal album, but hit the delete button and wrote Heritage instead.

Quote from: rumborak on April 26, 2017, 05:39:23 PM


My bigger point is that DT didn't deviate far from the center, and 25 years later this is now haunting them because they are still sorta expected to play 80s prog metal. Some people above say TA was a venture out, and indeed in some ways it was; but look at JLB's Nefaryus vocals. Unnecessary vocal lines that live became a big issue.

That's one of the reasons I dig The Astonishing(musically -- the "venture") They've been a "by numbers" band since the End of the Octavarium Tour. I've always been a fan of a band with that much talent pushing the envelope (Though I suppose the economics would dictate that they wouldn't do that.)

I think tuning down is necessary for LaBrie to be able to do his best on these songs. I'm not really a fan of changing instrumental parts but then again I don't go to live concerts. I WILL be going to this one though and I love the album so I'd like to hear everything as close as possible to the original work...with down tuning and maybe changing vocal melodies for LaBrie.

I think I'll be happy with whatever they end up doing because it'll be my first time seeing them.

Quote from: MirrorMask on April 21, 2017, 10:44:39 AM
I was perfectly fine with the way they handled. Guitars don't age, vocal chords do. What's the point in having James choke on himself every night?

:lol

Quote from: Sycsa on April 24, 2017, 11:04:06 AM
I geniunely don't understand why someone wouldn't like some changes made to the songs, like jams, alternative solos and whatnot. What's the point of playing (or wanting to hear) a song exactly like it was recorded over and over again in perpetuum? I'd go even further, lose the click and play the songs faster, with more energy, but that won't happen.

Speaking only for Herrick I love the album versions and I'm not a concert-goer. I want to hear the album (or songs whatever) played live. I love those songs. Some of the different things they've done live like Ruddess's silly stuff in A Change of Seasons...I'm not a fan of. But I totally understand why other fans want to hear something a little different especially if they've seen the band live a few times or a lot of times.  And the band plays these songs live fucktons of times so I get why they want to do something a little different. It's coool.

Quote from: TAC on April 26, 2017, 04:36:46 PM

Opeth had no choice but to go away from death metal vocals, especially if they wanted to actually attract fans. Maybe it was legitimate, like they just didn't want to do it anymore, but to me, it seems more of a business decision, than an artistic one.

From the interviews I've seen and just listening to the band over the years (they've never been straight up Death Metal) I believe it's legitimate. The fact that Akerfeldt drastically changed the musical direction of the band proves (at least to me) that he didn't want to do that style of music any more. The lack of Death Metal vocals is the least of what certain fans dislike about new Opeth methinks. The "band" (Akerfeldt) could've continued with the older musical style and used less harsh vocals and I bet most fans would be content with that.