What makes Six Degrees one song and not SFAM ?

[Kotowboy]

Interesting question ?

SFAM has one story throughout and recurring musical motifs and themes, whereas Six Degrees has lots of individual stories, not as many recurring motifs..

[Chino]

The fact that on Score it is one track.

[Implode]

Mainly because the band says so.

[ReaPsTA]

Six Degrees was written and recorded as one song before it was broken up into multiple tracks for listener convenience.  Scenes was always written and recorded as multiple tracks which formed a concept album.

Artist intention does actually matter.

[blackngold29]

So maybe next we'll get a "song cycle" (like PT's The Incident), which are individual songs but are meant to be played together. But yeah, it's pretty much been said, that's what the band considers them.

[IdoSC]

Scenes was always written and recorded as multiple tracks which formed a concept album.

"Always" is a big word ---> FII Demos.

But yeah, artist intention is something I agree with.

[Killer123™]

Actually, I once thought "Metropolis" is one damn long song, consisting of part 1 (The Miracle and the Sleeper) and part 2 (SFAM)

[IdoSC]

Actually, I once thought "Metropolis" is one damn long song, consisting of part 1 (The Miracle and the Sleeper) and part 2 (SFAM)

I think you already know what I'm going to say because you said you "once thought", but I'll give it a go anyways:
Initially the "Pt. 1" was a joke I believe, then they actually planned to write a Part 2 song as a part of FII, then it evolved into a whole album.

[ZirconBlue]

*shrug*  I don't actually consider Six Degrees to be one song.  I think of it as a suite.

[bosk1]

Actually, I once thought "Metropolis" is one damn long song, consisting of part 1 (The Miracle and the Sleeper) and part 2 (SFAM)

I think you already know what I'm going to say because you said you "once thought", but I'll give it a go anyways:
Initially the "Pt. 1" was a joke I believe, then they actually planned to write a Part 2 song as a part of FII, then it evolved into a whole album.

This is correct.

*shrug*  I don't actually consider Six Degrees to be one song.  I think of it as a suite.

You aren't the first to be confused about that.  One of the cool things that a lot of fans appreciate about DT is that they push the boundaries of traditional musical concepts, which is what they did here.  So that can make it tough to figure out how to refer to something like Six Degrees.  Is it a suite or a song?  However, the fact that the band wrote it as a song and considers it a song is what makes it a song at the end of the day.

[Hal Incandenza]

You aren't the first to be confused about that.  One of the cool things that a lot of fans appreciate about DT is that they push the boundaries of traditional musical concepts, which is what they did here.  So that can make it tough to figure out how to refer to something like Six Degrees.  Is it a suite or a song?  However, the fact that the band wrote it as a song and considers it a song is what makes it a song at the end of the day.

In that case, they definitely succeeded in pushing boundaries.  I can safely say that Six Degrees is the only song in my music collection where I generally skip sections of the song because I don't like them as much as the rest of it.

[bosk1]

I'm guessing that the fact that they inserted courtesy track breaks is another factor, and that if other long songs similarly had track breaks separating different movements, you might do the same.  I know I might at times.  I know I occasionally do that with The Whirlwind.

[Ben_Jamin]

According to the cd, 6DOIT is a song with 8 sections.

SFAM is a concept album with 2 Acts.

[Dublagent66]

SFAM = Album
6DOIT = Title track on an album

The difference seems pretty clear to me.

[Implode]

However, the fact that the band wrote it as a song and considers it a song is what makes it a song at the end of the day.

While I agree with you in this case, there are many times in the music world where other parties besides the artists determine what the compositions are classified as, especially with musical genres. Like how Philip Glass disagrees his minimalist classification, and how Yes disagrees with its progressive classification.

[ZirconBlue]

Actually, I once thought "Metropolis" is one damn long song, consisting of part 1 (The Miracle and the Sleeper) and part 2 (SFAM)

I think you already know what I'm going to say because you said you "once thought", but I'll give it a go anyways:
Initially the "Pt. 1" was a joke I believe, then they actually planned to write a Part 2 song as a part of FII, then it evolved into a whole album.

This is correct.

*shrug*  I don't actually consider Six Degrees to be one song.  I think of it as a suite.

You aren't the first to be confused about that.  One of the cool things that a lot of fans appreciate about DT is that they push the boundaries of traditional musical concepts, which is what they did here.  So that can make it tough to figure out how to refer to something like Six Degrees.  Is it a suite or a song?  However, the fact that the band wrote it as a song and considers it a song is what makes it a song at the end of the day.

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter.  Plus, while I'm sure MP considers it one song, I'm not entirely sure all of the remaining members of the band agree. 

Finally, the fact that they play sections of it as standalone songs further clouds the issue.

[bosk1]

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter.  

Absolutely.  A listener is also free to believe the song is about unicorns and killer robots. The band has no control over that.  But the listener is objectively wrong in both scenarios.  

[Dublagent66]

 

[axeman90210]

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter. 

Absolutely.  A listener is also free to believe the song is about unicorns and killer robots. The band has no control over that.  But the listener is objectively wrong in both scenarios. 

I wouldn't be so dismissive bosk, how many of us would have guessed that Octavarium was about Jumanji until Sigz showed us all the light...

[Hal Incandenza]

Well then.

[MetropolisxPt1]

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter. 

Absolutely.  A listener is also free to believe the song is about unicorns and killer robots. The band has no control over that.  But the listener is objectively wrong in both scenarios. 

I wouldn't be so dismissive bosk, how many of us would have guessed that Octavarium was about Jumanji until Sigz showed us all the light...

[orcus116]

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter.  

Absolutely.  A listener is also free to believe the song is about unicorns and killer robots. The band has no control over that.  But the listener is objectively wrong in both scenarios.  

I wouldn't say "Six Degrees" is objectively one song, mainly because its wide range of styles and clear, distinct sections make it flow more like a suite than a song.

[Aniland]

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter.  

Absolutely.  A listener is also free to believe the song is about unicorns and killer robots. The band has no control over that.  But the listener is objectively wrong in both scenarios.  

Absolutely not. The listener is not objectively wrong to think of eight separate tracks, with eight separate titles and eight separate sounds, as eight separate songs. The Glass Prison was not not a song, just because four more came to be in a suite. It doesn't matter that 6DOIT was made in one chunk and were set next to one another; it's no more one song than A Mind Beside Itself songs.

[bosk1]

It doesn't matter that 6DOIT was made in one chunk and were set next to one another

You're right.  Those things don't matter.  But what does matter is that SDOIT was written and is considered by the band to be one song.  That is all that matters and that ends any speculation.  It isn't a suite.  It is a song.  There is no grey area there whatsoever.

Similarly, A Mind Beside Itself was written as three separate songs comprising a suite, and the band considers it a suite.  Again, that ends it.

[skydivingninja]

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter. 

Absolutely.  A listener is also free to believe the song is about unicorns and killer robots. The band has no control over that.  But the listener is objectively wrong in both scenarios. 

Absolutely not. The listener is not objectively wrong to think of eight separate tracks, with eight separate titles and eight separate sounds, as eight separate songs. The Glass Prison was not not a song, just because four more came to be in a suite. It doesn't matter that 6DOIT was made in one chunk and were set next to one another; it's no more one song than A Mind Beside Itself songs.

But A Mind Beside Itself was not composed to be one song.  It was meant as a suite.  Three separate songs.  On Score, 6DoiT is one track.  On LSFNY, AMBI is three tracks because there are three separate songs.  The 12 Step Suite is five distinct songs, and if it were played live would not be condensed into one "12 Step Suite" track.  6DoiT was written as one song and is referred to as such by the band.  I never know what's so difficult to understand whenever this "debate" pops up.  As Reap said, artist intention does matter in some cases.  This is one of them.

[bosk1]

More people should listen to ninjas who leap from the sky.  That's all I'm saying.

[Perpetual Change]

It doesn't matter that 6DOIT was made in one chunk and were set next to one another

You're right.  Those things don't matter.  But what does matter is that SDOIT was written and is considered by the band to be one song.  That is all that matters and that ends any speculation.  It isn't a suite.  It is a song.  There is no grey area there whatsoever.

Similarly, A Mind Beside Itself was written as three separate songs comprising a suite, and the band considers it a suite.  Again, that ends it.

These musical terms are nowhere near as precisely defined as you and most people here pretend they are, especially when applied to the works of a prog-metal band.

In my opinion, a suite is a song that incorporates multiple musical movements and some other element not related to the music, i.e. a ballet (Like Nutcracker Suite) or some kind of thematic element which ties it all together, i.e. "Pictures at an Exhibition" or even just fapping over the Beatles a'la "Suite Charlotte Pike". If "Pictures at an Exhbitition" is a suite,  so is 6DOIT and many other long Dream Theater works, including Scenes.

The thing is, though, we're trying to reconcile terminology barely used outside of classical music with conflicting terminology that already exists in the rock tradition. Is SDOIT a suite? A song? An epic? A mini-concept record? I've heard it described as all four, but a "song" is a word that describes popular forms of music., a "suite" refers almost exclusively to classical music, I still don't know what an "epic" actually is and I don't think "mini concept records" are real. Certainly, if Copland were writing music today and "Appalachian Spring" was a prog-rock record probably wouldn't know which we should call it anymore, either.

But we, as fans of a genre that borrows from all genres past and present, don't really have the privilege of boxing what we listen to in neatly defined categories. And honestly, the people making this music like the Dream Theater guys and people like Neal Morse probably haven't even thought about it very much, so neither should anyone.

It's just too bad we have a forum definitions thread which doesn't really reflect the grayness of the issue.

[skydivingninja]

Well, an epic sort of describes the song.  Its based either on feel or length, depending on how they use it.  And yeah, we can point to traditional definitions of suites and songs, but if a band considers their work a "concept album," a "suite," or a "song," then that's how it should be referred to. 

Different example: Steven Wilson calls The Incident a song cycle, not a song or a concept album.  So that's what it is.  Whether you listen to it all at once or in pieces is your preference, but trying to debate that seems kind of silly. 

[Dimitrius]

Mainly because the band says so.

[ZirconBlue]

I'm not confused, I just disagree.  Once an artist releases their work they lose some control over how it is perceived.  They can call it a song all they want, but the listener is free to have their own opinion on the matter. 

Absolutely.  A listener is also free to believe the song is about unicorns and killer robots. The band has no control over that.  But the listener is objectively wrong in both scenarios. 

Absolutely not. The listener is not objectively wrong to think of eight separate tracks, with eight separate titles and eight separate sounds, as eight separate songs. The Glass Prison was not not a song, just because four more came to be in a suite. It doesn't matter that 6DOIT was made in one chunk and were set next to one another; it's no more one song than A Mind Beside Itself songs.

But A Mind Beside Itself was not composed to be one song.  It was meant as a suite.  Three separate songs.  On Score, 6DoiT is one track.  On LSFNY, AMBI is three tracks because there are three separate songs.  The 12 Step Suite is five distinct songs, and if it were played live would not be condensed into one "12 Step Suite" track.  6DoiT was written as one song and is referred to as such by the band.  I never know what's so difficult to understand whenever this "debate" pops up.  As Reap said, artist intention does matter in some cases.  This is one of them.

A) I have seen no one but Mike Portnoy discuss the issue in any way, so, absent evidence to the contrary, I'm not willing to concede that "Dream Theater" thinks of it as one song.  

2) Regardless, artists do not get to define their work.  If Beethoven had written a symphony, but called it a piano concerto, it would still be considered a symphony today.  Artists do not control the perception of their art.  I'm sure Melville or Picasso would roll over in their graves if they were to hear some of the interpretations of their work that are being taught on high school and college campuses today.  But art doesn't exist in a vacuum.  It requires both a creator and an audience, and the audience gets the last word.  

I have the utmost respect for DT, having followed them since 1992, but that doesn't mean that I have to take everything they say as gospel.  If Lady Gaga comes along with a 3-minute pop song and insists on calling it a "symphony" are you going to let "artist intention" reign and back her definition?

[bosk1]

...and the audience gets the last word.   

Um...no.  That's never true.

[skydivingninja]

That Picasso example deals with artistic interpretation.  We're talking about classification here.  And considering how MP was sort of the unofficial spokesman for the band, of course any band stance on the matter would have come out of his mouth.  

[Perpetual Change]

That Picasso example deals with artistic interpretation.  We're talking about classification here.  And considering how MP was sort of the unofficial spokesman for the band, of course any band stance on the matter would have come out of his mouth.  

That's true, and I'm not saying the band aren't allowed to control how they market their product. But it's annoying to see everyone jump in with "well, the band says this so there's no contest" every time someone brings up another way to look at things. I love classical music, especially symphony suites and ballets. The experience of listening to Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence is nearly identical to that of listening to a suite, regardless of what the band says, and the same goes for Scenes. I don't see why it's such a crime to discuss appreciating the band's material from that aspect.

Is Bohemian Rhapsody a Rhapsody? No! 

[bosk1]

But it's annoying to see everyone jump in with "well, the band says this so there's no contest" every time someone brings up another way to look at things.

No one is doing that "every time someone brings up another way to look at things."  It is only with respect to things that are black and white.  As was said above about song meanings, for example, some songs are left open-ended where there is plenty of room for interpretation as to what it means.  In that context, it is perfectly valid for someone to say "I think this means X," or "this means X to me."  Various interpretations can be valid (I say "can" because that also depends.  E.g., JP has said TAMP is about losing his father.  If I say, "to me, it is about JP losing his dog," that would be objectively incorrect.  But if I said, "In the broader context, to me it is about the feelings of loss in dealing with a loved one," that would be valid).  But as far as classification of what a piece of music is, that's determined largely by the band.

[Perpetual Change]

Eh, as I stated above, there's nothing "black and white" about those terms, especially as they're currently being applied. There's what the band considers their work to be, what others consider it to be, and what it really is-- and no one should put too much weight behind any of that. Remember how, for the longest time, Steve Wilson rejected the "progressive" label for his music?

Frankly, when Mike Portnoy says things like "No, AMBI is a suite, SDOIT is one song," he's doing so because he's trying distinguish something that should be listened to as a whole (SDOIT) with something that can be listened to as a whole or in parts (AMBI). To my ears, SDOIT is very much like a "suite" and AMBI is more like those types of song-cycles SDN mentioned above. Whether the band call it that or not is inconsequential.  If the band were actually really that clear about defining what works are supposed to be considered what, and if the distinction between "suite" and "really long song with different movements and elements" was actually a meaningful one, I'd be more willing to admit that I was "objectively wrong" about that.

Until then, though, I'm not going to jump down anyone's back for calling Six Degrees a "suite" when it's supposed to be "one song." It is really like a suite in every way and, honestly, it works better as that than "one long song" anyway, where it's disjointed at best.

Out of curiosity, do you know how Neal Morse describes his songs? "Seeds of Gold," to me, seems to be a suite. As does the Whirlwind. But I'm interested in what he says. Is Whirlwind a suite, a concept record, or one long song? Those definitions aren't necessarily conflicting with one another, but I'd be interested to see because I think in terms of musical and thematic structure both The Whirlwind and SDOIT are very similar. Both have overtures and regularly refrained melodies and, thematically, both deal with how something (hardship-God/emotional disorders) affect people without really telling much of an overarching story.