DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
Dream Theater => Dream Theater => Topic started by: Samsara on April 27, 2017, 10:52:20 AM
-
This thread was inspired by some of the commentary by rumbo and TAC, starting with this post:
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.
>>>I thought I'd continue it here. Reposting TAC and Rumbo's exchange, followed by my own comments:
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.
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 also found Rumbo's statement interesting. It's a big problem a lot of bands from the 80s and early 90s have. On one hand, those bands want to go different directions. But depending on the tenor of the fanbase, label wishes, and the general musical tastes of those fans of the particular genre, it usually goes too far one way, and then a rebound happens, and then there's a lot of...I guess you could stay retreading?
For me, I watched DT mature and advance through Falling Into Infinity. I felt they had started to mature as songwriters, and with some help from folks that were established songwriters, gain the knowledge to write for the song, as opposed to writing to "wow" people. I'm not saying DT always did the latter, but I do think their idea of songwriting was to give themselves an identity, sometimes at the expense of the song. Falling into Infinity changed that a bit. They finally had an album where changes were made to better THE SONG, and play to the melody, and still be this progressive giant.
And what happened? A lot of people shit on them for it, unfairly.
So what did they do? They "rebounded" by doubling down on that old identity, starting with arguably the fan favorite tune, "Metropolis" and patterned the band after that (and obviously, the record). SFAM was good, for sure, and a lot of good stand alone tunes too, so it's not like they abandoned what they learned. But they also to a degree, regressed back to who they were previously, and sort of stuck in that niche moving forward.
Fans usually have a heightened opinion of the impact of their own opinions (I've been guilty of it for sure), but in this case, the negative vibes from the fans, and MP's bitching about the record, really pushed Dream Theater into a box from which it pushed at, but never really expanded again. It helped them financially, and secured a solid following, but taking the "success" out of the equation, it really did shoehorn them into something.
They tried again with The Astonishing...and you see from the reaction where that got them...
Most bands of this time period of the early 80s to early 90s follow that sort of pattern. Queensryche got a bit more leeway from fans, I think, but their situation is unique to them. And in the end, they ended up moving back into "the box" I referenced above as well.
So yeah, the maturity of a band is a tricky thing. It can only go so far, particularly for acts that are successful. And while that sounds weird, when music is a livelihood, and its being made not just for art, but for money, it sort of just happens that way. That's why I think you see a lot of bands expand their horizons here and there with various songs, instead of complete directional shifts. This way they can take risks, expand, mature with small pieces here and there, but the majority is in the same wheelhouse to keep momentum and success.
Just my .02. Fascinating topic, Rumbo.
-
So because DT didn't dramatically change their sound like Opeth did going from death metal to 70's prog or like Rush when they decided to be a synth-pop group, that means they haven't matured? That's a big statement.
I also fundamentally disagree with Rumbys initial assumption that DT are pandering to a fan base by creating the music they create. That's a big, big assumption. I think the safer and far more reasonable assumption is that they are creating the type of music that they want to because they love it.
-
No way. If you ask me they always took big chances, which usually meant losing some fans and gaining some new ones, by making
different albums every single time.
-
Agree. Dream Theater have never made the exact same album twice.
Structurally - Systematic Chaos was Octavarium part 2 but sonically and musically they weren't very much alike.
A Dramatic Turn may have been the safest album in a while but I think it was deliberate.
DT12 was to see if they could make an album of shorter songs and The Astonishing is a 2 hour double concept album for goodness sake.
I think a lot of The Astonishing shows maturity and growth. To me - releasing pretty much the same album every single time like Motorhead, AC/DC, Slayer etc can be selling out just as much as going
ultra commercial - because you know the fans will eat it up and if you stray too far from your signature sound - it might not sell as well.
-
For me, I watched DT mature and advance through Falling Into Infinity. I felt they had started to mature as songwriters, and with some help from folks that were established songwriters, gain the knowledge to write for the song, as opposed to writing to "wow" people. I'm not saying DT always did the latter, but I do think their idea of songwriting was to give themselves an identity, sometimes at the expense of the song. Falling into Infinity changed that a bit. They finally had an album where changes were made to better THE SONG, and play to the melody, and still be this progressive giant.
And what happened? A lot of people shit on them for it, unfairly.
Not unfairly. What they did was, in many ways, change what and who they were from I&W and Awake.
SFAM was a return to form, embracing the progressive and instrumental virtuoso segments of their enormous talented, and not pretending to be anything else.
-
I think Scenes, Six Degrees, Train of Thought, Octavarium and parts of Systematic Chaos is an exceptional run of albums.
I think they lost something after that. Black Clouds felt a little like going through the motions and I think It took until The Astonishing to sound more like "classic" Dream Theater again.
When I first heard The Gift Of Music - my initial thought was that it could have been on Disc 2 of Six Degrees.
-
SFAM was a return to form, embracing the progressive and instrumental virtuoso segments of their enormous talented, and not pretending to be anything else.
Yeah, and going back and reading the OP, I totally disagree that SFAM was some sort of "regression" backward from FII. If anything I'd say SFAM was the band maturing, developing and moving forward better than ever.
-
Structurally - Systematic Chaos was Octavarium part 2 but sonically and musically they weren't very much alike.
Never noticed that untill now :o And I'm in a minority here, but I like SC much more than OV as a whole :biggrin:
-
Slight tangent but
Root of all Evil > Itpoe 1
I walk Beside You > Forsaken
Sacrificed Sons > Ministry of Lost Souls
Octavarium > Itpoe 2
( for me )
-
To me Dream Theater is one of the most mature bands in existence! They present themselves with class and their musicianship is above and beyond most bands.
-
To me Dream Theater is one of the most mature bands in existence! They present themselves with class and their musicianship is above and beyond most bands.
That's a great comment.
-
"Mature" ( ::)) sounds like it wants to be boring 3-chord pop rock with nothing of substance but a catchy chorus. Very glad they haven't "matured".
-
"Mature" ( ::)) sounds like it wants to be boring 3-chord pop rock with nothing of substance but a catchy chorus. Very glad they haven't "matured".
Huh?
-
So their point of regression is...when they did a prog-metal concept album?
-
I get what is meant by "regress", but I think that's the wrong choice of word, and also not accurate imo. Maturing is not about change for the sake of change. That can also be a sign of not having found your sound, which can show a lack of having matured. Maturing is about getting better at your craft and finding your own identity. SFAM showed all of the signs of a mature band that drew upon the strengths of everything that came before it, mixed with the enthusiasm and energy of their first couple of albums.
A band can evolve and mature while still covering the same area. If you compare how modern DT and early DT approach a similar style of song, you'll hear how they've matured as a band.
-
They tried again with The Astonishing...and you see from the reaction where that got them...
I can only speak for myself regarding TA, but TA's problem wasn't them actually daring to try something new. In fact, I can not recall a single online opinion saying so. I think everybody was eager (and looking forward to) something out of ordinary, since the ADTOE-DT12 sequence was definitely "safe territory" for lack of a better term.
-
Everyone has good points. we'll just have to disagree on the "maturity" aspect of it.
But to clarify, "regress" was probably a poor choice of words. I was listening to SFAM and was staring at "Regression," so that probably popped in while I was typing. lol. What I meant was, that DT decided to revisit elements that got them noticed in the first place (e.g. Metropolis), and construct the record around that (duh) and to a lesser extent, the band's "sound" around that as well. While it sounds good, and comfortable, and there are a million reasons to do it, my argument (and again, I realize there are holes, but there are in ANY position) it returned DT to a safer direction, rather than naturally move forward.
Did they mature? Well, yes and no. By ditching DS, and getting together with Jordan, they essentially became a different band again, as Jordan became a co-main songwriter with JP. So it's hard to judge. But I think its undeniable that instead of expanding upon their trajectory with FII, they instead went backward and re-focused the band on a certain segment of its sound.
Again, none of this is a bad thing, but I do think doing so sort of (it was, clearly, the right move for them for long term success) derailed them from really expanding and maturing as songwriters to a degree. The tunes got a lot more complex, sure. But to an extent they lost something too, a bit of soul, a bit of atmosphere, etc. Which is, at the end of the day, fine, for 90 percent of the fanbase, and it obviously worked for them.
But the position that moving that way stunted them somewhat as songwriters is still valid. We may not agree, but when you go back and revisit your past so distinctly like they did, you can grow from it, but possibly not as widespread as you might have, had you not. Listen to stuff like Speak to Me, Cover My Eyes, etc. They have never really branched out from those again. Sure, fans wanted more Metropolis-like tunes, but the fact DT was shifting and moving and evolving was, at least in my opinion, a good thing. But I realize I am in the minority on this.
-
Again, none of this is a bad thing, but I do think doing so sort of (it was, clearly, the right move for them for long term success) derailed them from really expanding and maturing as songwriters to a degree. The tunes got a lot more complex, sure. But to an extent they lost something too, a bit of soul, a bit of atmosphere, etc. Which is, at the end of the day, fine, for 90 percent of the fanbase, and it obviously worked for them.
But the position that moving that way stunted them somewhat as songwriters is still valid. We may not agree, but when you go back and revisit your past so distinctly like they did, you can grow from it, but possibly not as widespread as you might have, had you not. Listen to stuff like Speak to Me, Cover My Eyes, etc. They have never really branched out from those again. Sure, fans wanted more Metropolis-like tunes, but the fact DT was shifting and moving and evolving was, at least in my opinion, a good thing. But I realize I am in the minority on this.
Yeah, I still don't agree. Especially with the bolded. I think you are ignoring the fact that after SFAM, they went on to create SDOIT, an album that a lot of the fan base considered to be the peak of their songwriting, experimentation, atmospheric, moody, technical, proggy, all in one.
Basically, what you are saying is that the band hasn't really followed the sound they created on FII and in your opinion they should have, which is perfectly valid. But that doesn't mean they didn't expand and mature as songwriters. That doesn't mean they have been stunted as songwriters since then.
-
I don't agree with using SFAM as the pivot here. Sure, this was their "masterpiece", i.e. in the original sense of the word where you draw on existing skill to create the best piece you can, but they clearly moved on with SDOIT, and even more so ToT. I personally would call Octavarium the pivotal point where subsequent albums were incremental changes, no longer substantial changes.
-
Yeah, I still don't agree. Especially with the bolded. I think you are ignoring the fact that after SFAM, they went on to create SDOIT, an album that a lot of the fan base considered to be the peak of their songwriting, experimentation, atmospheric, moody, technical, proggy, all in one.
I do see your point. I am not ignoring anything. There is a difference between writing a great record (Six Degrees -- which I agree is great), and deliberately choosing to not go down a path that may have (I stress MAY) have opened up new and different horizons. It was a choice they made. I don't begrudge them for making it, I just think they could have been something a bit more natural (to my ears) and mature had they stayed the course.
Basically, what you are saying is that the band hasn't really followed the sound they created on FII and in your opinion they should have, which is perfectly valid. But that doesn't mean they didn't expand and mature as songwriters. That doesn't mean they have been stunted as songwriters since then.
Close, but not quite. Yes, in that I personally would have liked them to. But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that direction with FII was where JP was naturally going, and the band as a whole. And when they made the decision (in my opinion, because MP throwing his fit, fans jumping on board with MP, etc.) to instead do a 180, and stop that path and jump back aboard at the point of "Metropolis" and take a different path from there, they stunted a natural evolution of their sound in favor of what worked for them prior, and expanded from there.
Yes, they did "mature" from that point, but it wasn't really a natural evolution of their sound. It was more a deliberate forced "restart" they took, and it took away, IMO, some key elements that DT was just beginning to embrace and develop.
Is that more clear? I may have not explained it that well above. :)
-
I think the problem many are having with the premise of the thread, even after explained in the follow-up post, is that using terms like "mature," "regress," "stunted," missed chance/opportunity," those are loaded terms that make a value judgment and tend to couch the subjective in a cloak of objectivity, when there isn't any. No matter which way the band would have gone, we could look at that and say, "well, yeah, they did just fine going in that direction. But they clearly didn't live up to their potential because they clearly have the talent and ability to have explored direction Y, and they didn't, so missed opportunity." I mean, they had tossed around the idea of exploring world music as the basis for the overall sonic theme of their sixth album. But they didn't, thanks in part to a Pantera concert some of the members attended during that timeframe. Did they somehow fail to live up to their potential because they didn't explore and develop into the subgenre of progressive world music? I guess one could argue that. But I think most would say, "no," they went in a direction that made sense and spoke to them as musicians, and grew in that other area. They clearly have the ability to explore swing. Did they fail to live up to their potential by not doing so and releasing a progressive swing metal album? And on and on we could go.
And as far as using FII as the pivot point, I get it. But I think it misses something from the band's perspective. I think they were trying to grow and expand in a certain direction that was more along the lines of what eventually became SFAM. But, from their perspective (some of them, anyway), the label came in and "stunted their growth" by pulling them in a direction that didn't serve their collective talent/interests as a band, and it was a setback in terms of their evolution. It goes both ways, and is just a matter of perspective.
When it comes down to it, I don't discount AL's feelings on the subject, and I realize that a number of fans not only see some positives in the direction they were moving during the time of FII, but wish the band had continued more on that trajectory. That's all perfectly valid. But I think that when one tries to frame the discussion as that somehow being a "failing" or a "missed opportunity," we as fans go too far in editorializing DTs' history too much through the lens of our own subjective wants and desires, and I think that does the band and their history an injustice.
-
I'm saying that direction with FII was where JP was naturally going, and the band as a whole. And when they made the decision (in my opinion, because MP throwing his fit, fans jumping on board with MP, etc.) to instead do a 180, and stop that path and jump back aboard at the point of "Metropolis" and take a different path from there, they stunted a natural evolution of their sound in favor of what worked for them prior, and expanded from there.
Okay, but see, I don't think that is an accurate description of what happened. I do not think the studio version of FII accurately reflects where JP (or the rest of the band) actually was "naturally going." I say this for quite a few reasons:
-JP's own original compositions were altered, in some cases, significantly by the external sources the band were forced to work with. And while it is true that JP seems to have been fine with that, the point is that somebody else changed what he did, which by definition makes that album (or at least parts of it) decidedly NOT where he was naturally going.
-The "Fix for '96" shows showcase a much different sound for the material that was being written. That was the band performing some of the new material in the state they meant for it to be heard. I think that shows, in part, that the final product we ended up with is not "where the band was naturally going." Couple that with...
-We have the original demos. And we know that original demos of many of the songs were rejected by the label, which not only led to the band re-writing some of those songs, but also writing songs with a different sound so that the label would let them finally record and put out their album.
So all that said, I don't think it is accurate to say that what we got on FII was where the band was "naturally going." What we got was an album that had its sound, it's structure, and its very composition heavily influenced by forces outside the band. That is most decidedly unnatural in terms of where the band was going on its own. And that's fine. Although I had a strong negative reaction to the material at the time, I (like many others) came to really embrace it and love it. But love it or not, it's not accurate to say that that album captured the natural evolution of the band.
Yes, they did "mature" from that point, but it wasn't really a natural evolution of their sound. It was more a deliberate forced "restart" they took, and it took away, IMO, some key elements that DT was just beginning to embrace and develop.
Maybe it's just semantics, but I don't think "restart" is accurate either. I mean, they did purposely try to recapture a lot of what they did on the first three albums. But as was said above, it wasn't so much of a "let's go back to square 1" as much as "let's correct the course and get back on the trajectory we want to be on," which incorporates not only how the band had grown and matured on the first three albums, but actually did incorporate a lot of things from the FII era as well. So, I dunno...again, maybe it's just semantics, but "restart" doesn't really feel like the right way to describe where they were. It was more of a "course correction" than a "stop/restart," if that makes sense.
-
Yeah, basically what Bosk said...
I do see your point. I am not ignoring anything. There is a difference between writing a great record (Six Degrees -- which I agree is great), and deliberately choosing to not go down a path that may have (I stress MAY) have opened up new and different horizons. It was a choice they made. I don't begrudge them for making it, I just think they could have been something a bit more natural (to my ears) and mature had they stayed the course.
That's all well and good, but like I said before it seems based solely on your opinion. I think SDOIT was the band going down a path that opened new and different horizons.
Close, but not quite. Yes, in that I personally would have liked them to. But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that direction with FII was where JP was naturally going, and the band as a whole. And when they made the decision (in my opinion, because MP throwing his fit, fans jumping on board with MP, etc.) to instead do a 180, and stop that path and jump back aboard at the point of "Metropolis" and take a different path from there, they stunted a natural evolution of their sound in favor of what worked for them prior, and expanded from there.
Respectfully, I think a couple factors are important here - (1) none of us besides JP can say where he naturally wanted to head after FII, (2) JR became a major songwriting influence and could have naturally shifted things in the SFAM direction and (3) I think you might be overemphasizing the difference between FII and SFAM.
-
FII was an aberration and SFAM was a course correction, in a major way.
You just happen to prefer the aberration.
-
I think to an extent that they've regressed sonically.
That may be the old fart in me but I haven't liked the sound the last few albums. Maybe it's just the modern sound I'm not liking but there are other bands out there that I like their sound.
-
FII was an aberration and SFAM was a course correction, in a major way.
You just happen to prefer the aberration.
The art of being concise.
(https://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y204/highaerials36/hefdaddy42lol.jpg)
-
I'm not a huge Scenes from a Memory fan. It's a good album, but it's somewhat of a dividing line for me. At that time, DT felt like they could not go on without giving the fans exactly what they wanted. Everything since has felt slightly more calculated, with DT measuring their wants against what they think the fanbase will accept. I would have liked to hear another Falling Into Infinity, something with shorter songs and far less of a metal aesthetic. I like Derek and am curious as to what DT would have been had they not replaced him with Rudess. I'm curious about what would have happened if, as per Lifting Shadows, Dream Theater recruited more of a songwriter type vocalist after Six Degrees. A Dream Theater featuring Derek Sherinian and a songwriter as a vocalist - maybe they would have ended up sounding something like Flying Colors. I don't know, but I would have liked to hear that band. Maybe it would have been better than the DT we have now, or worse. No one can say for sure. But imagine a parallel world where Sherinian, Petrucci, Portnoy, and Myung are in Dream Theater and Liquid Tension still exists with Rudess. It wouldn't be that bad.
-
@bosky:
lol
-
My favorite part is the book on the desk. :lol
-
I do actually swear by the greatest of all writing books, Strunk & White's Elements of Style, and I live by rule 17.
Omit needless words.
And a copy IS on my bookshelf, but I don't keep it by my computer. Normally.
-
bosk - great counter. You're right, those terms are loaded. Not sure how more eloquently to put it, however.
Admittedly, it's hard to argue this, when yes, personally, I would have preferred they went down the route they were following. But I'd like to say that I'm objectively putting things out there as best as possible.
But everyone has good points. However:
FII was an aberration and SFAM was a course correction, in a major way.
You just happen to prefer the aberration.
While I love the conciseness of hef's post, and the latter sentence is indeed true. Why is FII the abberration, and SFAM a "course correction?"
Take what Mike posted --
Respectfully, I think a couple factors are important here - (1) none of us besides JP can say where he naturally wanted to head after FII, (2) JR became a major songwriting influence and could have naturally shifted things in the SFAM direction and (3) I think you might be overemphasizing the difference between FII and SFAM.
He's right in none of us besides JP can say where he wanted to head during or after FII, but the fact is, he did move toward a more melodic, soulful approach on FII, based on his muse, other commentary/influences, etc. What I am saying is that if that was his natural path to a degree (again, only he can answer that question, and now, 20 years later, the answer from him may be distinctly different in retrospect), the criticism from fans, MP's input, etc., may have steered him to revisit elements of Metropolis that lead to SFAM.
Mike is dead on that the keyboardist choice did impact the writing. it does in DT...DT with Kevin is much different than DT with either DS or JR, and vice versa. But remember that while they wanted JR after Kev left, they did go with DS, and saw something of value in what he brought to the band. They ditched that, and him, to go a more technical route, ala Metropolis. So something shifted their direction, that inner muse. And my thought is that shift occurred due in large part to MP and fan criticism that was stoked by MP's opinion. FII was doing really well at radio by me (Long Island) back then. So it was successful...yet...
And to further respond to Mike in regard to SFAM and FII - the albums are vastly different. Soncially, songwriting-wise. Nah, I don't think I'm overstating the difference at all. Completely different albums in almost every way, except for the guys playing (aside from JR being new, of course).
Anyway, I see this conversation going in circles a bit, and I really don't have much else to add, so I'll bow out. I don't necessarily think anyone is wrong (I could easily take the opposite position and counter myself). But thought rumbo and TAC's comments were worthy of fleshing out a bit. If folks disagree, that's fine. We can let the thread die.
Happy Friday everyone! Enjoy the weekend. :)
-
Mike is dead on that the keyboardist choice did impact the writing. it does in DT...DT with Kevin is much different than DT with either DS or JR, and vice versa. But remember that while they wanted JR after Kev left, they did go with DS, and saw something of value in what he brought to the band. They ditched that, and him, to go a more technical route, ala Metropolis. So something shifted their direction, that inner muse. And my thought is that shift occurred due in large part to MP and fan criticism that was stoked by MP's opinion. FII was doing really well at radio by me (Long Island) back then. So it was successful...yet...
And to further respond to Mike in regard to SFAM and FII - the albums are vastly different. Soncially, songwriting-wise. Nah, I don't think I'm overstating the difference at all. Completely different albums in almost every way, except for the guys playing (aside from JR being new, of course).
Anyway, I see this conversation going in circles a bit, and I really don't have much else to add, so I'll bow out. I don't necessarily think anyone is wrong (I could easily take the opposite position and counter myself). But thought rumbo and TAC's comments were worthy of fleshing out a bit. If folks disagree, that's fine. We can let the thread die.
Happy Friday everyone! Enjoy the weekend. :)
Good post, you don't have to bow out, I think its an interesting topic. I'll just say this regarding the difference between FII and SFAM - obviously they are pretty different, I guess I was just trying to say I see some elements that were a progression from FII, not necessarily a huge departure away from FII. While JP did go for a more metal, more technical approach on SFAM in comparison to FII, I think some of the melody and soulful playing he expressed on FII carried through and showed up in spots on SFAM. Also, I have always felt like FII was the first in a series of albums that really established what would come to be known as "the" MP drum sound and style. Just my two cents.
-
Yeah, I mean, I think it's great discussion either way.
-
I have to ask into the round though, is it just my perception that the "deltas", i.e. the change from album to album, dropped by a noticeable amount after Octavarium?
-
Why is FII the abberration, and SFAM a "course correction?"
Because FII is the one that is most different from the rest of the catalog (until The Astonishing), and everything they've done since then is, more or less, in the style of SFAM and the older albums, rather than FII.
That same span of time is when the band has had complete creative control, and could do whatever they wanted. If they felt led to do another album like FII (and IMO, Octavarium is the most similar), they could have at any time.
But that album was a lowpoint for the band in many ways, and SFAM was an obvious course correction.
-
I have to ask into the round though, is it just my perception that the "deltas", i.e. the change from album to album, dropped by a noticeable amount after Octavarium?
It's hard to pinpoint. I think maybe we liked what they were changing from album to album back then. Now, maybe the changes,(and all 3 studio albums with MM is different) isn't a sound that we like. Doesn't mean the songs are lacking or maybe it does. For myself, I don't like the lack of balance in the mixing(ADTOE), brickwall sound(DT12), and the drums not sounding organic(TA).
-
I'd say that they started catering more towards the fans after FII, as one person above suggested.
Longer songs and even longer songs, more widdly-widdly, NUGGETS, playing with numbers (album 6 has six songs, album 7 has seven songs, album 8 has to have eight songs), etc. Maybe all of that was started by the 12 Step Suite, where albums (it should just be limited to songs) had to be connected to each other, but to me, the band lost their focus on writing killer songs (re: I&W and Awake had amazing songs that felt epic, but were more condensed than 20 minute songs) and making sure that they engaged their fans with inside jokes hidden in morse code in the drum beat, or wearing their influences on their sleeves.
It's one thing to say "no more label interference," and it's another to go off the deep end to the extent that they did. They were capable of writing more concise, typical songs (Forsaken), but needed to pander to what the fans expected and wanted.
-
I think they catered to themselves. They were pushing back at their label wanting more control to do the music they wanted.
-
I have to ask into the round though, is it just my perception that the "deltas", i.e. the change from album to album, dropped by a noticeable amount after Octavarium?
My two cents: I think it's hard to quantify, but I guess I would agree with that, for the most part. At least, I felt like the deltas were fairly small from Octavarium to SC to BCSL. I think there was a bigger change with ADTOE and DT12. But I see that is somewhat more of a "course correction" again that got them back to where they were headed earlier (just not as big a course correction as the main one we are discussing in the thread).
But even if true, is that a problem? And isn't it to be expected once a band has, essentially, found their identity? Just asking the question. To me, it makes sense that, once a band gets a few albums in and are truly "veterans" at their craft, changes from album to album are naturally going to be smaller. I think it is natural that bands later in their career grow, not by drastically altering what they do, but by honing what they have already established. Do you disagree?
-
I have to ask into the round though, is it just my perception that the "deltas", i.e. the change from album to album, dropped by a noticeable amount after Octavarium?
It's hard to pinpoint. I think maybe we liked what they were changing from album to album back then. Now, maybe the changes,(and all 3 studio albums with MM is different) isn't a sound that we like. Doesn't mean the songs are lacking or maybe it does. For myself, I don't like the lack of balance in the mixing(ADTOE), brickwall sound(DT12), and the drums not sounding organic(TA).
It's hard to pinpoint. And maybe, for me, it was just fatigue, in the sense that I felt they were just retreading the same ground a lot. For a lot of people this is perfect from what I can gather because they can essentially say "if I feel like style X, I listen to band A, if I feel like Y I listen to B". MM of all said in an interview (paraphrased) "this is DT. If I want to listen to Kreator I will put on a Kreator album".
My preference is to see the artist grow over time of course, but there's definitely different camps among the fan base I think.
EDIT: This post is probably also a convenient response to bosk's post!
-
No, and it's a a wonderful problem to have. It's longevity and brings these questions up. A rare few bands continue to evolve. Many people say Rush evolved every three albums but I can't tell you how many times I heard ,"Nah, it sounds like Rush."
Our ears are trained to hear the subtle differences that others don't. That's why we have threads like this.
@Rumbo. It's also 20 some odd years and our taste change over time. So that might play into it as well.
-
I don't really know if they change less from album to album now...
8V to SC was a pretty different shift. I'd say maybe SC to BC&SL was the least they changed from modern album to modern album. I think ADTOE was, while in a lot of ways a throw back to an earlier DT sound, it was still pretty different than the albums that came before it. DT was much weightier and concise and then obviously TA was a big shift.
-
Re: the FII-SFAM thing being a point of departure--if it was truly this "never look back" move, I don't think Octavarium would've happened. Stuff like TALW and IWBY are in the FII direction and, I would say, even more out of their norm than the FII stuff like Anna Lee.
Re: the shifts getting smaller recently, sure, but most other bands, even prog ones, reach that point of "diminishing deltas" quite a bit before album 8. That's just the nature of veteran musicians in the vast majority of cases, I think.
-
Interesting thread. I have a few general thoughts, none of which are a response to any specific post or poster:
- Whether or not an artist changes style over time is not a huge deal to me. I think that overthinking that kind of thing can cause one to miss the forest through the trees, so to speak. What matters is whether a riff makes you want to pick up a guitar, or a chorus makes you want to go sing karaoke. :hat
- On the other hand, I also understand that the law of diminishing returns applies to music, and that if you're listening to a band all the time, and then they release an album that's more of the same, that album's impact could be reduced by the familiarity of it all. The solution there, at least in my experience, is to simply not overplay bands too much. Leading up to new albums from artists I like, I'll make a conscious effort to go as long as six months without touching their stuff, which a lot of times is enough to make even their most overplayed hits sound fresh.
- Dream Theater may not make huge changes from album to album, but the changes are significant enough that if you skip between albums in half-decade intervals, the differences are actually quite stark. As an example, I can imagine a new listener being taken a back if you played them Images and Words -> Falling into Infinity -> Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence -> Systematic Chaos -> A Dramatic Turn of Events -> The Astonishing in succession. I must admit, however, that as people have already stated, the differences lessen as you go deeper in that run. :lol
- In comparison to Opeth and Steven Wilson, I see a couple of very obvious differences between them and Dream Theater that explain their varying approaches:
- Petrucci and Rudess seem to have a very joyful, optimistic view of their music. They love playing what they play. Mikael and Steven, on the other hand, have a more introspective and, dare I say, pretentious approach. Those dudes never seem happy with anything.
- Dream Theater knocked out their experimental stage early, versus Opeth, who didn't significantly change their sound until around 20 years in.
Now, none of those contrasts apply to Rush, who were experimenting their whole career and don't have an uptight bone in their body (well, at least Geddy and Alex don't, who write all the songs). Please understand that I'm not trying to make brilliant, all-encompassing rationales for why Dream Theater are the way they are. Just making a few observations. :millahhhh
- Frankly, I think that the changes in Opeth and Steven Wilson's music are a little overblown. Don't get me wrong, the shifts from Watershed ->Heritage and The Incident -> Insurgentes were very significant, but since then, they actually haven't changed things much. I would actually argue that the three album run of ADTOE -> The Astonishing has at least as many twists and turns as Heritage -> Sorceress or Grace for Drowning -> Hand. Cannot. Erase. :chill
I'm about to do something that I usually hate. I'm also probably wrong. I'm going to put my Skip Bayless hot take hat on and make a totally random statement devoid of any evidence or support: I think that artists like Opeth, Radiohead, Steven Wilson, etc. sometimes get a little more credit than they deserve for their experimentation because they are always talking about how much they like to experiment. It's kind of like how Mike Portnoy always talked about how he didn't like Falling into Infinity, which then led to some fans who automatically didn't like it.
- While there are many bands who have evolved more than Dream Theater, I think that there are perhaps even more bands, especially within the metal universe, who have actually evolved much less than Dream Theater. Big-time groups like Iron Maiden and Megadeth come to mind. At the end of the day, this is all relative, basically. :tup
Anyhow, just my two cents. Props to anyone who actually read through all that crap.
-
Fantastic post TOX, and some great points. Lots to chew on.
-
I'm not bothered about how much they mature on each album - just that all 14 albums don't sound absolutely the same.
I could never be a big fan of AC/DC, Motorhead, Slayer, Bad Religion etc etc...
Bands where you know how the album will sound before it's out.
-
Real good post TOX, I agree on most of your points.
-
That's my TOX. Clearly a seasoned poster.
-
Fantastic post TOX, and some great points. Lots to chew on.
Yup. :TOX:
-
First, reaffirming what others had said, DT had Metropolis Pt. II as a demo for FII. That indicates that even if the final result was the FII we all know, this wasn't completely up to them. Had to say FII was an evolution or a sign of maturity when it already had a sapling of the next album which supposedly was a "restart".
Second, about the album variety. Sure, after some albums the deltas start getting smaller. When marking points in a region, even with a random probability, they start getting closer to each other. Unless one expected DT to play in all styles possible to have a very large range of music styles (something they got strongly criticized for in TA; not by me), this return was bound to happen. Also, if one considers the albums in reverse order from TA to WDADU, to analyze their deltas, we discover SFAM doesn't appear to bring anything new to the table, FII is a throwback to the softness of TA and some Octavarium, Awake is a return to aggressiveness, I&W is simply a ADTOE Pt. II, and WDADU also stays in the same range as their previous discography.
-
Also, if one considers the albums in reverse order from TA to WDADU, to analyze their deltas, we discover SFAM doesn't appear to bring anything new to the table, FII is a throwback to the softness of TA and some Octavarium, Awake is a return to aggressiveness, I&W is simply a ADTOE Pt. II, and WDADU also stays in the same range as their previous discography.
Man, imagine TA dropping out of nowhere as a band's debut.
-
But is a progression we are talking about fischermasamune. Going backwards doesn't work! :lol
-
But is a progression we are talking about fischermasamune. Going backwards doesn't work! :lol
It worked for Rush!
:neverusethis:
-
You checked out in the 80s Tim with Rush. You know bupkis! :lol
-
In all seriousness, my issue isn't so much with 80's Rush, it's with 90's-00's Rush. I do like Counterparts, and enjoy Presto for what it is, but really, until Clockwork Angels, every album from Hold Your Fire to S&A felt like they were just winging it. THAT is my problem with Rush.
-
I get it. They went away from what you loved about them.
-
I get it. They went away from what you loved about them.
No, that's not it at all. I can at least respect the 80's stuff. After that, it just felt like they weren't really challenging themselves. I mean, I know Neil studied different drum methods and all, but ..
-
I think they were. Challenge themselves sonically. Sometimes it failed with VT. Musically, that was very different for them.
-
You checked out in the 80s Tim with Rush. You know bupkis! :lol
Fortunately for me, I never checked in with Rush.
-
You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave!
-
I get it. They went away from what you loved about them.
No, that's not it at all. I can at least respect the 80's stuff. After that, it just felt like they weren't really challenging themselves. I mean, I know Neil studied different drum methods and all, but ..
I see what you are getting at. I very much dislike post-Signals Rush until Counterparts. So I am anti-(most of) synth era. That said, I respected the fact they kept evolving. But once they really moved into the 90s, while I very much like records such as Test for Echo, Vapor Trails and Snakes and Arrows, I do admit they don't really push any boundaries or take any leaps. Clockwork Angels is fantastic, sounds a bit different, is a concept album, and frankly, it is one of my favorite Rush records because of that.
So I totally hear what TAC is saying and agree.
-
Presto was the album that got me into Rush along with Exit Stage Left. I saw them on the Presto tour for the first time and I was forever hooked, a phenomenal show! My senior year in high school 1990. I shortly jumped on the Yes and Dream Theater bandwagon afterwards..
-
Just saw them play I&W last week and man, I forgot how much I love hearing these songs played AND ACOS as an encore. Got really emotional hearing those classic songs played. Miss that old style although they have grown.
-
You checked out in the 80s Tim with Rush. You know bupkis! :lol
Fortunately for me, I never checked in with Rush.
Some people live an empty life.
-
I wouldn't say DT missed their chance to mature. I would say their lyric quality has regressed over the years, which is more noticeable after Six Degrees. While the earlier years were more focused on the introspective side, the lyrics from SC and Black Clouds, and a few of them in Octavarium, were just dreadful (Count of Tuscany, Dark Eternal Knight, Octavarium the song, Forsaken) and more fantasy based/oriented. Not sure if it was because they were just cranking albums at a very fast pace. The lyrics were also very straightforward. ADTOE and DT 12, seemed to have returned a bit onto the introspective side with some open interpretation.
-
I would say their lyric quality has regressed over the years, which is more noticeable after Six Degrees. While the earlier years were more focused on the introspective side, the lyrics from SC and Black Clouds, and a few of them in Octavarium, were just dreadful
Yeah, I can't disagree too strongly
(Count of Tuscany, Dark Eternal Knight, Octavarium the song, Forsaken)
Wait, what?
-
I think Black Clouds was the non plus ultra for bad lyrics.
They were much better on A Dramatic Turn of Events and since then.
-
Listening to their whole discography again, it seems to me that Dream Theater seems to hit the reset button every three albums or so:
Images and Words
Scenes from a Memory
Octavarium
A Dramatic Turn of Events
DT14 (based on recent interviews with band members)?
Octavarium seems to be the odd album out of this bunch, but given the direction they were going in with SDOIT and ToT, Octavarium really felt like DT trying to a more signature sound (Muse-inspired and poppish songs aside).
-
I remember back in the day that someone (Portnoy?) described Octavarium as a classic / "normal" DT album... after an experimental one (Six Degrees) and a heavy one (Train), Octavarium was the "standard" DT album that was missing since a while.
Don't remember the exact quote but the sense of it was this.
-
Octavarium seems to be the odd album out of this bunch, but given the direction they were going in with SDOIT and ToT, Octavarium really felt like DT trying to a more signature sound (Muse-inspired and poppish songs aside).
Those songs are like half of the album! :lol
-
Octavarium seems to be the odd album out of this bunch, but given the direction they were going in with SDOIT and ToT, Octavarium really felt like DT trying to a more signature sound (Muse-inspired and poppish songs aside).
Those songs are like half of the album! :lol
Exactly. So of the 8 songs on 8vm.........2-3 are DT sounding?
-
Octavarium seems to be the odd album out of this bunch, but given the direction they were going in with SDOIT and ToT, Octavarium really felt like DT trying to a more signature sound (Muse-inspired and poppish songs aside).
Those songs are like half of the album! :lol
Exactly. So of the 8 songs on 8vm.........2-3 are DT sounding?
That's why I've always struggled with liking the album. I mean, it has some great songs, but a lot of it just doesn't sound too much like DT. Plus, like I read someone else here on DTF said, looks like they were more interested in the nuggets than the actual songs. To me, something's just not right with the album (just my opinion, of course).
Also, Never Enough is one of my least favorite DT songs of all time (maybe has to do with the fact that I don't really like Muse).
-
I like Never Enough for what it is, it's just that knowing Muse you can't un-remember that the ispiration is way too heavy. It's still a decent enough song, and the lyrics at most are just that vague enough (maybe not the second verse) for forgetting about their actual meaning and pretend they're about whoever is pissing you off and not appreciating you.
-
Octavarium seems to be the odd album out of this bunch, but given the direction they were going in with SDOIT and ToT, Octavarium really felt like DT trying to a more signature sound (Muse-inspired and poppish songs aside).
Those songs are like half of the album! :lol
Exactly. So of the 8 songs on 8vm.........2-3 are DT sounding?
I would say that TROAE, These Walls, Sacrificed Sons and Octavarium are DT sound. Given how long Octavarium is, it's well over half the album.
-
Or half the album
I'd forgotten about These Walls. Good catch.
Still hard to say it's a return to classic DT sound.
-
Yes. That's why I said it was sort of the odd man out of all the albums I mentioned. It only comes across to me as a return to a more clasdic DT sound in the context of the darker direction they have been taking with SDOIT and ToT.
-
To me, the experimental direction they took with SDOIT was the right path to follow, but it all went sideways with TOT, OVM and so on. ADTOE was the return to the right path, imo. Hopefully they make another experimental album like Six Degrees.
-
Octavarium seems to be the odd album out of this bunch, but given the direction they were going in with SDOIT and ToT, Octavarium really felt like DT trying to a more signature sound (Muse-inspired and poppish songs aside).
Those songs are like half of the album! :lol
How so?
The title track alone takes up nearly 32% of the album.
Sacrificed Sons takes up about 15%.
The other six tracks are all poppy or Muse-like??
-
Honestly I think the best example of what I'm interpreting Samsara's point on "maturing"/"evolving" to be would be Fates Warning. Not sure if I'm understanding the argument right or not though.
But I think it's a bit of a hard point to discuss in relation to DT. My personal favorites from the band are their darker and prog-y albums, namely Awake and Six Degrees.
-
Octavarium seems to be the odd album out of this bunch, but given the direction they were going in with SDOIT and ToT, Octavarium really felt like DT trying to a more signature sound (Muse-inspired and poppish songs aside).
Those songs are like half of the album! :lol
How so?
The title track alone takes up nearly 32% of the album.
Sacrificed Sons takes up about 15%.
The other six tracks are all poppy or Muse-like??
I was talking about the song count (4 vs 4) not song lenght. Even if we count the lenght and how much % it takes from the album, we can still say that a big part of the album isn't "classic DT sound"by any means. Not that that's a bad thing, just it doens't fit with the "classical DT album" label that we were talking about.
-
Well, I sort of see the Octavarium album as really primarily about the Octavarium song, with the rest as just candy. :lol So the spirit of the album for me is based on the spirit of that particular song.
To me, the experimental direction they took with SDOIT was the right path to follow, but it all went sideways with TOT, OVM and so on. ADTOE was the return to the right path, imo. Hopefully they make another experimental album like Six Degrees.
But they did take the direction of SDOIT, afterwards, or at least the direction of The Glass Prison. Blind Faith also would not really fall far from what they did afterwards up to BC&SL, as well as some portions of the SDOIT song. What they did not pursue is the direction of Misunderstood, TGD and Disappear.
-
I'd also argue that 8vm, the song, is a pretty distinct entity and that while it contains some aspects of core DT sound, it's pretty unique and even set the stage for future DT sound. So I also wouldn't call the song classic DT.
Once again, not a criticism.
-
I'd also argue that 8vm, the song, is a pretty distinct entity and that while it contains some aspects of core DT sound, it's pretty unique and even set the stage for future DT sound. So I also wouldn't call the song classic DT.
Once again, not a criticism.
It is ACOS' worthy successor.
-
I'd also argue that 8vm, the song, is a pretty distinct entity and that while it contains some aspects of core DT sound, it's pretty unique and even set the stage for future DT sound. So I also wouldn't call the song classic DT.
Once again, not a criticism.
It is ACOS' worthy successor.
As a concept and a long song, sure. But "classic DT" is not just a long song. Or a good song. It can be really good without being a return to the core sound. It was an exploration of new sound.
-
I'd also argue that 8vm, the song, is a pretty distinct entity and that while it contains some aspects of core DT sound, it's pretty unique and even set the stage for future DT sound. So I also wouldn't call the song classic DT.
Once again, not a criticism.
It is ACOS' worthy successor.
As a concept and a long song, sure. But "classic DT" is not just a long song. Or a good song. It can be really good without being a return to the core sound. It was an exploration of new sound.
Well, yeah. I am thinking more of defining the core DT sound as melodic prog metal with prominent keyboards that do not sound like a distorted guitar. :lol
-
I think what Dream Theater didn't have that the next generation of Prog or Prog/metal bands have was Dream Theater. They were influenced by Dream Theater and were able to build upon that.
-
I think what Dream Theater didn't have that the next generation of Prog or Prog/metal bands have was Dream Theater. They were influenced by Dream Theater and were able to build upon that.
Or, they more blatantly pulled from their influences to bring that music out to the forefront a bit more. The song Octavarium may mean a lot of different things to people. However, it really (the whole album, honestly) was almost an homage to prog bands that Dream Theater liked, like in the way Avenged Sevenfold channeled, and some would say blatantly copied, Metallica and Megadeth.
In both cases, for me, it really was a major turnoff.
-
I think what Dream Theater didn't have that the next generation of Prog or Prog/metal bands have was Dream Theater. They were influenced by Dream Theater and were able to build upon that.
This may sound very confusing, but I think you nailed it with this. Best example I could think of is Haken. They started sounding very DT-like and now they've developed their own sound that definitely has some DT in there, but with a more modern, even djenty, sound; without sounding like a standard djent "modern" band such as Periphery.
-
im not a huge fan of DT12 and didnt like TA at all. i understand we will never get another masterpiece like Awake, and ToT can't be successfully duplicated. I wish petrucci would go back to the mindset he was in when he wrote ADTOE. it's not necessarily an original album per se, but it still sounds very fresh and many of the songs are memorable.
-
I'm not a huge fan of DT12, but I don't have any major issues with it either. I actually found that one safer than ADTOE. I feel like those albums should've come out in reverse order.
And if you (not YOU PB1) didn't like TA, you sure as hell ain't getting another one of those again, so don't let that stop anyone from looking forward to the next album.
-
there are a few reasons I enjoy ADTOE so much
- I really didn't care for the direction that Portnoy took DT after Train of Thought (I really liked Octavarium, SC was ok and I didn't like Black clouds at all)
- Mike Portnoy had waaaay too much creative control in terms of song writing. I felt like Petrucci and co just went along with trying to write songs in the vein of whatever portnoy's flavor-of-the-month band inspiration was at the time, without much resistance
- After all of the Portnoy drama (much if not all of it he brought on himself) subsided, I was excited to hear what Petrucci could come up with now that he didn't have portnoy to "influence" his songwriting process. You can really feel how inspired Petrucci and the rest of DT were when they wrote these songs. I mean it doesnt really get any more epic than when the band comes in at 0:45 of Outcry.
-
ADTOE is my #3 DT album, so you're preaching to the choir brother.
-
You know what? On this I would have to say no. And here is why: Dream Theater was something about them, like a nuance, that no other band in my opinion has. (except for Rush and maybe Pink Floyd or Neal Morse). Like if I go and listen to another Prog Metal band or really just any band that is considered progressive, (by mainstream or otherwise) something key to me is missing. Like even with my least favorite albums done by them (Self Titled, The Astonishing) I can still fall in love with the little, seemingly unimportant bits. For example The Walking Shadow to me is an amazing piece of music in almost every way.
But they lost a bit of that nuance once Portnoy left, and Mangini just doesn't really fit. Though I would say they are still a mature band that is slowing trying to get back what they lost when Portnoy left.
Any of you guys know what I am saying?
-
I get what you're trying to say. I've been thinking about this one a lot lately and I think it has a lot to do with nostalgia. They might have grown up a bit too MUCH. I mean, I miss some of the marvelous melodic lines from the past when I listen to the newest material, but there hasn't been one new released lately that I haven't enjoyed at least somewhat and I'm still impressed most of the time what they come up with musically.
-
For my tastes, DT has a sense of melody that most other modern prog bands seem to be lacking. That, and their experience with songwriting, is what still separates them from the vast majority of other prog bands.
Again, for me and my tastes.
-
ADTOE is my #3 DT album, so you're preaching to the choir brother.
I personally wouldn't rate it that highly, but it's easily their best album in the last 10 years.
-
ADTOE is my #3 DT album, so you're preaching to the choir brother.
I personally wouldn't rate it that highly, but it's easily their best album in the last 10 years.
When it came out I loved it. But I re listened to it the other day, and to me the drumming seemed weaker then I remember... Anyone else feel this?
-
No.
-
ADTOE is my #3 DT album, so you're preaching to the choir brother.
I personally wouldn't rate it that highly, but it's easily their best album in the last 10 years.
When it came out I loved it. But I re listened to it the other day, and to me the drumming seemed weaker then I remember... Anyone else feel this?
Not me. OTBOA, LNF, BITS, and BAI are still drumming gems.
-
ADTOE is my #3 DT album, so you're preaching to the choir brother.
I personally wouldn't rate it that highly, but it's easily their best album in the last 10 years.
When it came out I loved it. But I re listened to it the other day, and to me the drumming seemed weaker then I remember... Anyone else feel this?
Not me. OTBOA, LNF, BITS, and BAI are still drumming gems.
Don't forget Outcry! MM is on fire on the instrumental section :metal
-
ADTOE is my #3 DT album, so you're preaching to the choir brother.
I personally wouldn't rate it that highly, but it's easily their best album in the last 10 years.
When it came out I loved it. But I re listened to it the other day, and to me the drumming seemed weaker then I remember... Anyone else feel this?
Not me. OTBOA, LNF, BITS, and BAI are still drumming gems.
Don't forget Outcry! MM is on fire on the instrumental section :metal
I'll re-listen to it today then I suppose... :))))
-
I personally like DT12 more than ADTOE, even though they are both very good. I actually like DT12, ADTOE, and TA as much as anything in the entire DT catalog. And yes, I like TA better than Scenes From a Memory by far!
-
DT hit the peak of their maturity with SDOIT. It's like reaching the top of a mountain. Nowhere else to go but down. They haven't been able to do anything at that level since. BAI comes very close. It's like a twin peak in itself but they are definitely in the valley now. Not sure how a band can be mature at this late stage when they've ventured so far from the roots of what they once were.
So yeah, they really didn't miss the chance but they somehow failed to maintain it.
-
DT hit the peak of their maturity with SDOIT. It's like reaching the top of a mountain. Nowhere else to go but down. They haven't been able to do anything at that level since. BAI comes very close. It's like a twin peak in itself but they are definitely in the valley now. Not sure how a band can be mature at this late stage when they've ventured so far from the roots of what they once were.
So yeah, they really didn't miss the chance but they somehow failed to maintain it.
I actually think they've matured more since Six Degrees, and that's saying alot! To me they are still on the top of the mountain in no danger of descending.
-
DT have matured like mature cheddar cheese :)
The cheese is stronger with every album but that's how I like it