Musings on Old DT

[TheOutlawXanadu]

Last night I listened to (old) DT for the first time in months.

I really enjoyed what I heard. I don't listen to them much anymore, but DT were one of the most important musical discoveries of my life, so whenever I do, it's like seeing an old buddy and cracking open a beer.

While I was listening, there were a few things that struck me about their old sound that I really liked. In this thread, I will try to articulate those thoughts. I know the 'Old vs. New' argument has been debated into the ground, but some of these things I don't recall reading about much.

Forgive me if I am mistaken.

1) Nap Time

What struck me about songs like "Wait for Sleep", "To Live Forever", "Eve", "The Silent Man", "Lifting Shadows off a Dream", "Hollow Years" and "Speak to Me" was their sense of quiet. When I say that, I'm not talking about the fact they're short. Or that they're not metal. I'm talking about the fact you could lull a baby to sleep with them. They're so subtle. So understated.

These days, DT seem to have moved away from songs with a sense of quiet. Even "Wither", for example, which is a short, un-metal song, isn't exactly quiet. It's got big, booming vocals and a rockin' guitar solo. Doesn't mean it's a bad song - although, surprise, I don't like it much - but it's a good example.

Even "Trial of Tears", which is like 14 minutes long, sounded like a quiet epic to me. The thing just flows. And the ending is big but not, like, "Octavarium" orchestra with a guitar solo where Petrucci howls to the heavens big.

Lacking quiet songs doesn't mean new DT sucks. But I miss them. And they're one of my favorite parts of old DT.

2) Hooks Disguised as Complexity

What struck me about songs like "Take the Time", "Surrounded", "Metropolis", "6:00" and "Hell's Kitchen" was how they all had super complex parts or solos that were really, really hooky. For example, 3:40 in "Surrounded" and 3:00 in "Hell's Kitchen". Those licks or whatever the fuck you call them have been stuck in my head all day!

These days, I associate super complex parts or solos with shredding and unisons to end instrumental sections that I couldn't remember to save my life. Definitely wouldn't call them hooky.

Lacking hooky complex parts or solos doesn't mean new DT sucks. But I miss them. And they're one of my favorite parts of old DT.

3) Sounds Like You Got Kicked in the Balls

What struck me about I&W - FII (some) was LaBrie's vocals. His old operatic style suits him so well. It suits DT's music so well too. I think it makes him sound so interesting.

These days, now that LaBrie's vocals are much simpler, I hate to say it but he sounds so bland. I feel strange saying that because usually I like simple vocals more. But in his case, his current, non-screechy vocals are worse for him than his original, operatic style.

I also liked how he used to participate more in heavy songs. These days, Portnoy has started contributing more to heavy parts. I liked, especially on Awake, the snarl he used to showcase during heavier parts.

Having simple vocals doesn't mean new DT sucks. But I think their older vocal styles suited them better. I miss them. And they're one of my favorite parts of old DT.

[Zook]

I completely agree, but I do still much enjoy their heavier output.

[robwebster]

Very cool post.

1) See, I think you're right when you say that they don't do the quiet songs as much any more. Repentance is probably the closest they've got as late. But, in my opinion, Dream Theater are at their strongest by far when they're writing big, bombastic things. That's clearly where their skill is. Wait for Sleep is beautiful, and a favourite of mine, and I'm so glad they wrote it - I wouldn't refuse a few more small songs. But if you listen to, say, the Count of Tuscany, you're clearly listening to a band in their element.

2) I agree! Although, I think Images and Words is the only really "hooky" album. But it's beautiful! Sublime. Fantastic. Nigh-on perfect. Oh Take the Time in particular is a glorious thing. And Learning to Live! Fantastic. It's a shame their instrumentals aren't groovy and catchy in the same way.

But, I'd say they've not entirely lost it. For me, the album in a slightly distant second would have to be... Octavarium. All sparkling and new, but there it is! I sincerely don't think there's a single forgettable moment on it. All the instrumental sections are so melodic. Especially in the title track! I don't understand why OVM isn't a fan favourite just like Images and Words. And then there's Never Enough. Nobody ever talks about the instrumental section in that track. Not once. But everything about it is fantastic. It's not quite a solo, it's a kind of unison riff, but it's very complex and yet thoroughly infectious at the same time.

BCSL is quite good for hooks, too. Not better than the early stuff perhaps, but there are lots of very musical moments. The whole intro to The Count of Tuscany is catchy. There are absolutely no lyrics, but it's so beautiful and infectious. Maybe it's a major-scale thing. So I don't think it's something they've entirely left behind. But yes, lovely. They need to do more of that.

As a kind of counterpoint to your comment about the instrumental sections, though, when I listen to older DT I'm often struck by - again, bar IAW - how hooky the non-instrumental sections aren't. They've got a hell of a lot stronger at writing choruses and verses. I mean, take your pick! In the Name of God, Constant Motion, Heretic from ITPOE2, The Root of All Evil, A Nightmare to Remember... their choruses and vocal melodies are so much more infectious nowadays than they ever have been. So they've almost gone the other way, vocally. Even on Images and Words - which is, admittedly, relentlessly catchy - I remember not initially warming to Metropolis or Learning to Live at all, because I thought the verses were a bit lifeless. I still think that of Metropolis, if I'm honest, although I like the song more nowadays.

[pogoowner]

Nice work, TOX. I agree with your points.

[ZKX-2099]

1.) Repentance, The Answer Lies Within, First half of Octavarium, Vacant, Disappear, Goodnight Kiss.

2.) I don't even get what your bitching about here. The new Dream Theater is full of hooks and complexity.

3.) I love new LaBrie just as much as old. For example the end of The Shattered Fortress. NAILED IT. And the the "beautiful agony" part from A Nightmare To Remember, tip top.

[KevShmev]

2.) I don't even get what your bitching about here. 

 

He's not bitching; he made some very good points, and made them without criticizing or flaming the new material.  Calm down, mkay?

But yeah, some great points, TOX.  I especially agree with some of the old hooks being in the playing, not necessarily in the vocal melodies.  Not that the vocal melodies didn't have hooks, because they did, but there were definitely some great hooks in the instrumental sections.  Good call! 

[AwakeFromOctavarium]

Talking of Labrie's vocal. Nothing from new DT sounds like his vocal in
1. Take the Time(the very first verse)
2. Learning To Live(the very first verse and the following heavy complex verse)
3. Surrounded(the verses in the faster part)

The vocal in Awake got much simpler IMO. I&W is the best example for his vocal complexity.

[antigoon]

Cool thread TOX. I especially agree with your first point. The "quiet songs" as you refer to them have, over time, become my favorite Dream Theater songs and the ones I re-visit most frequently.

There's another thing I discovered about old DT as well. It's weird to say this, but John Petrucci's old solo spots (I was listening to a track titled "Awake Jam" from 11/18/1994) were amazing. His playing was so lyrical and expressive and his tone was much more direct. He relied less on speed and more on phrasing and he incorporated chromatic notes and an overall jazzy feel so well - His solo on To Live Forever from the Live In Tokyo DVD is my favorite Petrucci moment of all time.

I felt weird typing that because John Petrucci is what keeps modern Dream Theater great. He's been the anchor of the band and his playing has been so consistent throughout his career and I think some of the solos he recorded on Black Clouds are among his best. I just really liked what he was doing in the early '90s. 


I hope that didn't come off too whiney.

[KevShmev]

In regards to Petrucci's playing, I will make a point I have made before: I think his Ibanez sounded better, especially when it came to shredding.  The guitar he uses now sounds really good, too, but the Ibanez sounded so thick and juicy.  Even when he shredded on the Ibanez, it still sounded so juicy, and you could still almost pick out every note.  On the Music Man, the shredding sometimes comes across like just a flurry of notes; whether or not that is in the structure of the solo, or the difference between the guitars, I am not sure, but it is just something I have noticed.  When it comes to rhythm playing, it is probably about equal, but when it comes to shredding and soloing, the Ibanez was where it was at, if you ask me.

[antigoon]

I think it definitely has something to do with the fact that he's using a really large amount of delay and chorus now.

[FlashCE]

Completely agree, especially point #2. DT has always been about shredding and showing off, but they used to be so catchy. Listen to Take the Time's instrumental section. It's complex, over the top, but yet so beautiful. Then listen to Raw Dog...

[contest_sanity]

And then there's Never Enough. Nobody ever talks about the instrumental section in that track. Not once. But everything about it is fantastic. It's not quite a solo, it's a kind of unison riff, but it's very complex and yet thoroughly infectious at the same time.

YES!!!  One of my most favorite moments on a splendid album.  Shall we start a Never Enough Kinda Almost Not Quite Solo Section Appreciation Thread?

[MajorMatt]

I think it definitely has something to do with the fact that he's using a really large amount of delay and chorus now.

Definately. Especially live and on the YouTube videos he has been featured in (especially the DiMarzio one). Imo the passages that he plays would sound really cool without all of the delay, to me that amount of delay kills it. It sounds as if he uses his 'volume swell' patch for soloing now (i.e. a delay time of 400/800 L/R respecively or something around there). If he toned it down to what he had going on on the 8V tour and anything prior it would be so much clearer and 'juicer' imo.

Matt

[TAC]

I recently listened to I&W on our last trip and it really struck me how out of this world the vocals were. I mean, that was an incredible performance.
I do miss that element in current DT especially the last 2 albums. I would say that James has sung his parts perfectly, but I really feel he is underutilized. His performance on the BC&SL Covers CD is incredible.

[j]

There's another thing I discovered about old DT as well. It's weird to say this, but John Petrucci's old solo spots (I was listening to a track titled "Awake Jam" from 11/18/1994) were amazing. His playing was so lyrical and expressive and his tone was much more direct. He relied less on speed and more on phrasing and he incorporated chromatic notes and an overall jazzy feel so well - His solo on To Live Forever from the Live In Tokyo DVD is my favorite Petrucci moment of all time.

I felt weird typing that because John Petrucci is what keeps modern Dream Theater great. He's been the anchor of the band and his playing has been so consistent throughout his career and I think some of the solos he recorded on Black Clouds are among his best. I just really liked what he was doing in the early '90s. 

Yes.

But yeah, some great points, TOX.  I especially agree with some of the old hooks being in the playing, not necessarily in the vocal melodies.  Not that the vocal melodies didn't have hooks, because they did, but there were definitely some great hooks in the instrumental sections.  Good call! 

Yes, although they still write some instrumental sections that have these qualities.  I just don't think there are as many (or that they're quite as creative), and the ones there are seem to be overshadowed by the multitude of aimless shreddy ones.  ITPOE Pt. 1, Sacrificed Sons, The Count of Tuscany, Octavarium, SDOIT, Blind Faith, The Great Debate...etc.  Robwebster pointed out Never Enough: although I think the song is weak (and the album, for that matter), that is a very good instrumental break that is often overlooked, probably because people don't like the song around it. 

I also sort of agree with rob's point about their vocal melodies/choruses improving.  I don't think it's a definite trend, but I think in general they've gotten a little better at making their choruses "stick", so to speak.

Anyway, good points in the OP too.  I feel the same way about most of them.

-J

[Samsara]

Last night I listened to (old) DT for the first time in months.

I really enjoyed what I heard. I don't listen to them much anymore, but DT were one of the most important musical discoveries of my life, so whenever I do, it's like seeing an old buddy and cracking open a beer.

While I was listening, there were a few things that struck me about their old sound that I really liked. In this thread, I will try to articulate those thoughts. I know the 'Old vs. New' argument has been debated into the ground, but some of these things I don't recall reading about much.

Forgive me if I am mistaken.

1) Nap Time

What struck me about songs like "Wait for Sleep", "To Live Forever", "Eve", "The Silent Man", "Lifting Shadows off a Dream", "Hollow Years" and "Speak to Me" was their sense of quiet. When I say that, I'm not talking about the fact they're short. Or that they're not metal. I'm talking about the fact you could lull a baby to sleep with them. They're so subtle. So understated.

These days, DT seem to have moved away from songs with a sense of quiet. Even "Wither", for example, which is a short, un-metal song, isn't exactly quiet. It's got big, booming vocals and a rockin' guitar solo. Doesn't mean it's a bad song - although, surprise, I don't like it much - but it's a good example.

Even "Trial of Tears", which is like 14 minutes long, sounded like a quiet epic to me. The thing just flows. And the ending is big but not, like, "Octavarium" orchestra with a guitar solo where Petrucci howls to the heavens big.

Lacking quiet songs doesn't mean new DT sucks. But I miss them. And they're one of my favorite parts of old DT.

2) Hooks Disguised as Complexity

What struck me about songs like "Take the Time", "Surrounded", "Metropolis", "6:00" and "Hell's Kitchen" was how they all had super complex parts or solos that were really, really hooky. For example, 3:40 in "Surrounded" and 3:00 in "Hell's Kitchen". Those licks or whatever the fuck you call them have been stuck in my head all day!

These days, I associate super complex parts or solos with shredding and unisons to end instrumental sections that I couldn't remember to save my life. Definitely wouldn't call them hooky.

Lacking hooky complex parts or solos doesn't mean new DT sucks. But I miss them. And they're one of my favorite parts of old DT.

3) Sounds Like You Got Kicked in the Balls

What struck me about I&W - FII (some) was LaBrie's vocals. His old operatic style suits him so well. It suits DT's music so well too. I think it makes him sound so interesting.

These days, now that LaBrie's vocals are much simpler, I hate to say it but he sounds so bland. I feel strange saying that because usually I like simple vocals more. But in his case, his current, non-screechy vocals are worse for him than his original, operatic style.

I also liked how he used to participate more in heavy songs. These days, Portnoy has started contributing more to heavy parts. I liked, especially on Awake, the snarl he used to showcase during heavier parts.

Having simple vocals doesn't mean new DT sucks. But I think their older vocal styles suited them better. I miss them. And they're one of my favorite parts of old DT.

Did you go into my brain or something? Fully agreed on all points. I miss Dream Theater circa (1992-1997). All those factors you listed were dead-on. I'd add that DT also doesn't allow room for songs to "breathe" now, like they used to in the earlier records. This point is basically what you touched upon by calling it "quiet" and "understated." Exactly. A less is more approach.

[hefdaddy42]

Great post, TOX.  Agree 100% on everything you posted.

But I still like most new DT stuff as well.

[Dream Team]

I agree, but maybe we can look at it this way:

If you're like me and been married 20+ years, your wife may not have the killer body anymore and may have a few gray hairs and wrinkles, but you still love her just as much if not more so. Why? Well, you didn't just marry her for her body, she has all those other wonderful qualities that you love and probably appreciate even more as time goes by. 

[wasp2020]

Yes, I agree, something I'd definitely love to see is more clean, quiet, major key sections. The beginning of Count of Tuscany is one of the best moments in recent DT history, I think. Surrounded, Learning to Live, Trial of Tears, etc... Even Under a Glass Moon has that cool clean verse sandwiched in this metal song that isn't too heavy for it's own good.

Something I also really love is their rock songs - About to Crash is a prime example, simply excellent song, as is Surrounded (again), Take the Time, etc... The Best of Times' beginning verses was a decent shot at it, I guess, but it failed it my eyes (no thanks to the vocals). I was surprised when I heard them say it's hard for them to write a major key song like that, when they seemed to handle it just fine before.

[LudwigVan]

TOX those are some great insights into the subtle changes that DT's sound has gone through over the years.   

[ariich]

Some interesting points there TOX, although on the whole I mostly disagree.

I don't really understand the "no quiet songs" thing, although I'm not sure what you're defining as "new DT" here. But what stops Disappear, Vacant, The Answer Lies Within and even, arguably, Repentance being quiet songs? Seems to just be BC&SL that doesn't have a song that's quiet all through, though it has a higher proportion of soft sections that most DT albums.

I also feel that DT still have plenty of hooky complex sections (Octavarium and TCOT are amazing examples of this. Even ANTR in fact which, aside from the solos, has a fantastic instrumental section). Maybe they have a few sections these days that aren't very interesting, but that doesn't mean the hooky ones have disappeared.

And I know JLB's vocal style is a matter of preference, but I personally prefer his more recent vocal style to the over the top wailing of the 90s. Not that it was bad as it suited the music and the time, just a personal preference really.

But the main thing that I don't get is, even if those elements were missing, why anyone should "miss" them. If you want a certain element or aspect, listen to the music that has it. What's to miss?

[TheOutlawXanadu]

But the main thing that I don't get is, even if those elements were missing, why anyone should "miss" them. If you want a certain element or aspect, listen to the music that has it. What's to miss?

It's just another way of saying I wish they still did whatever I was complaining they don't do anymore.

[Bombardana]

Agreed on all points. Especially #2.

[Bone_Daddy]

I'd add that DT also doesn't allow room for songs to "breathe" now, like they used to in the earlier records. This point is basically what you touched upon by calling it "quiet" and "understated." Exactly. A less is more approach.

+1 on "breathe"

I really felt that ToT had no breathing on it what-so-ever to the extent that Vacant seemed rushed as well. Don't get me wrong, I like the album but when I was listening, I said to myself: Just Let Me Catch My Breath. - pun intended.

I often feel that MP doesn't let songs (FII and forward) breathe either. I once complained about it to my brother stating that I hear a *explicative* *explicative* drum fill after every 4-8 measures of the song. A friend of mine (not really a DT fan) also complained that JP's shredding is great but there is just too much of it in the songs. I had to agree. I'm not taking away any of MP and JPs talent. These guys are on the top of what they do for a living. I just think they could incorporate a little more of the subtleties as they did with previous (older) albums.

On a side note with regards to less is better: Is that why I can rarely hear John Myung's bass in the mixes? I'm sure this has been discussed to some extent but I couldn't resist - the bass mix in IaW and Awake are damn good - lacking in albums after that.

[KevShmev]

Regarding the breathing thing, I think the mellow section in "A Nightmare to Remember" is an excellent example of them allowing a newer song to breathe, but it does seems like they do less of that nowadays.  

As for Portnoy, I think the drums are too loud in the mix far too often, and often at the wrong times.  Even though I am not a big fan of "Sacrificed Sons," the verses are kind of cool, with the mellow piano and soft vocals, but then you get Portnoy's drums, which are way too loud in the mix, and he hits them way too hard, too, when some nice subtle, soft flourishes could have worked just as well, IMO.

[Samsara]

The "breathing" point has a LOT to do with Mike's drums, and also the guitars.

I really admire the drumming on FII, and Mike just doesn't play with that kind of nuance and finesse much any longer, IMO. It's funny, I actually prefer watching MP play OUTSIDE of DT nowadays more than IN DT.

And JP. JP used to play with (and I know this irks some folks, so I'm sorry) a lot more feel. He knew when NOT to play, which is a key element in talking about what I feel is missing from new DT and was present in older DT. There is something to be said of the concept "less is more." I just wish DT would employ that genuinely, without forcing it (Repetence, IMO, for example).

The overall issue is, IMO, the way they write. The whole sit in the studio and write/record just doesn't lend itself to letting songs marinate for months and going back to them and eliminating stuff that seems overdone. While some fans and the band hated having to write songs and submit them to the label for approval, I think it was helpful because it allowed the band to really spread their creative wings a bit and just try stuff, and let stuff sit, and keep writing different things, instead of being focused on "ok, we are writing and recording from October to December, and then will begin mixing Jan. 2, with mastering on Jan. 21."

I know that's melodramatic on my part, but the point is, everything on old DT seems to me to have been worked on longer, and a lot of fat trimmed off (whether by the band or the label), and the songs just were better constructed.

[TAC]

The overall issue is, IMO, the way they write. The whole sit in the studio and write/record just doesn't lend itself to letting songs marinate for months and going back to them and eliminating stuff that seems overdone. While some fans and the band hated having to write songs and submit them to the label for approval, I think it was helpful because it allowed the band to really spread their creative wings a bit and just try stuff, and let stuff sit, and keep writing different things, instead of being focused on "ok, we are writing and recording from October to December, and then will begin mixing Jan. 2, with mastering on Jan. 21."

Sam, this is a valid point. I hate the bitching about "new DT", but there's something to be said for this. Burning My Soul from the Old Bridge CD came up on my shuffle this afternoon and taking Hell's Kitchen out of it was a great move. Now I have a quality track with lots of feel (Hell's Kitchen) and one I can skip all together (BMS).
Under current format you have a great mid section within a sucky song.

[rumborak]

The overall issue is, IMO, the way they write. The whole sit in the studio and write/record just doesn't lend itself to letting songs marinate for months and going back to them and eliminating stuff that seems overdone.

I hate to say it, but Raw Dog has the same problem again. I read MP's interview where he was touting the fact that the songwriting for the song had essentially happened in the course of a few hours, and IMHO, it totally shows in the song. One may say of course that I was biased towards that impression given I had read the interview before hearing the song, but I think I still would have had the same impression without reading it.

rumborak

[RandalGraves]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x8cOfXPI1Y&feature=PlayList&p=FE9FF0F073E2029E&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=34

Beautifully fucking illustrated.

[bosk1]

TOX, I don't necessarily share your viewpoints, but still a great post.

Regarding the breathing thing, I think the mellow section in "A Nightmare to Remember" is an excellent example of them allowing a newer song to breathe, but it does seems like they do less of that nowadays.  

This, to me, sums up where I feel the band is on this.  They still do it, and do it as well as ever.  They just do it less.

...everything on old DT seems to me to have been worked on longer, and a lot of fat trimmed off (whether by the band or the label), and the songs just were better constructed.

This is an interesting point.  I don't disagree that taking the time to let things set and then coming back to them later almost always produces a better product.  But then I look at the process on the earlier albums, and...I'm just kind of at a loss.  Let's skip WDADU and look at the next four albums and ACOS:

-I&W:  Great album.  Lots of writing and rewriting and outside input before a final product.
-Awake:  Great album, but written in less time than TOT.  Hmm...
-ACOS:  Perfect example of something written beforehand that sat around for a long time where the final, finished product ended up being better for the process.  IMO, the final version is WAY superior to the earlier versions.
-FII:  We all know the story here.  Mixed results as far as the individual songs.  In some cases, the final versions were a lot like the demos--not a lot of changes.  In some cases, better demos were scrapped for inferior final songs.  In others, better final product than the original demos.  But in terms of an album, we DID get a much different album than we would have gotten without the extra time and the outside influence.  And for the most part, it was a better album.
-SFAM:  Anther odd one.  In a sense, there was a lot of pre-writing and a long period of time for the material to sit in terms of the demo being worked on during the FII sessions.  But then again, none of the ideas in the instrumental demo even remotely qualified as a finished song.  The final album was written pretty quickly, but they did have a lot of pre-existing ideas that they had worked on together prior to the formal writing of SFAM.  So this sort of supports your point.  

I dunno.  I'm not saying you are wrong.  I think your general principle is absolutely correct.  But in looking at DT's history, things didn't necessarily always go the way you would have expected if the "take your time and let the songs marinate" model is always the correct one.

[King Postwhore]

I recently listened to I&W on our last trip and it really struck me how out of this world the vocals were. I mean, that was an incredible performance.
I do miss that element in current DT especially the last 2 albums. I would say that James has sung his parts perfectly, but I really feel he is underutilized. His performance on the BC&SL Covers CD is incredible.

What is weird about the vocals is they had the music done for some time so it wasn't like JLB was there for the sessions.

[bosk1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x8cOfXPI1Y&feature=PlayList&p=FE9FF0F073E2029E&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=34

Beautifully fucking illustrated.

I don't know what that's from, but it's absolutely hilarious.

[rumborak]

-Awake:  Great album, but written in less time than TOT.  Hmm...

Really? I was not aware of that. ToT was written in less than a month IIRC, I can't imagine Awake having been written in that short a time, especially considering how MP was pointing it out in the ToT video back in the day at how little time it took them to write ToT.

There is also one big difference I think: DT hadn't discovered their "writing process" yet. It seems as of late (from an outsider view) that the writing process has been somewhat mechanized, with fixed "DT style" construction schemes. When I listened to Raw Dog the first time, I could have told you beforehand when the solo would come, and also that JR would follow JP's solo. I have the impression they have accumulated themselves a toolbox over the years, and now they're just doing a lot of plug-and-play. Not to say that they're not creating new ideas in their songs, but I haven't been really surprised in their late output.

rumborak

[Mebert78]

-Awake:  Great album, but written in less time than TOT.  Hmm...

Really? I was not aware of that. ToT was written in less than a month IIRC, I can't imagine Awake having been written in that short a time, especially considering how MP was pointing it out in the ToT video back in the day at how little time it took them to write ToT.

Yea, I didn't know that either.  I trying to think back into what the "Lifting Shadows" book said about how fast it was written.  However, didn't Awake have demos?  If you make demos, that shows me that stuff is in the works for a while and you're playing around with it.  Plus, they played the beginning of "The Mirror" as far back as "Live In Tokyo," so some of the material had been in the works for a while. 

[hefdaddy42]

Band is on record as saying that Awake and Train of Thought were both written in about the same amount of time (roughly three weeks).  Incidentally, both were also demoed before going into a studio for final recording (instrumental-only in the case of TOT).