Just how technically complex is Dream Theater?

[Vajra]

I know very little about music theory, so I’m not one to notice technical prowess in songs. My question is, compared to other Progressive and Technical Metal bands, where does DT rank amongst them in terms of their skill and complexity?

Also, which sections of specific DT songs include the “complex” elements? I’m interested in listening to songs and knowing before hand if it’s very deep in technique, just so I have an idea of what complexity sounds like.

And finally, can someone give me an example of an odd time signature, because till this day I still remain oblivious to what an odd time signature sounds like, and I know DT is infamous for having them.

[Jamesman42]

Like, a good amount or so.

[robwebster]

Time signatures... most songs have what's known as a 4/4 pulse. You can count "one, two, three, four" and the pattern will repeat again. If not 4/4, then certainly 3/4 (i.e., "one two three one two three"). It's a simple time signature - easy to dance to, easy to drum to, uses familiar structures, etc.

Listen to a song like Panic Attack, though, and while you can count "one, two, three, four" at first, by the time it gets to the verse you'll find the patterns repeat every five beats. Or, in a more complex song - such as the midsection to Sacrificed Sons - 10, then 9, then 10 again...

Just try and count along with the beats. The melodies don't arrive at regular intervals. It's very much a "feeling" thing - if you wanted, you could argue that every song ever was in 1/4, and start counting "one, one, one," but if you can keep a steady count and recognise where the riffs end, you'll get there.

[ricky]

dream theater's music is incredibly varied. overall, they can be classified as complex. they do have some very simple songs, with the usual I-IV-V progression. however, they also have songs on the entire other end of the spectrum, like The Dance of Eternity, due to it's atonal (you could argue polytonally chromatic, i've actually seen the score) nature as well as it's rather bizarre use of odd time signatures.

in direct answer to your question, they are indeed VERY complex; not just with regard to the meters they choose to use, but also in their unpredictable song structure, which is expected of progressive music.  

if you don't know music theory at all, an odd time signature could be hard to explain. my advice is to start here - https://www.musictheory.net/

I used to recommend this site to my students due to the simplicity with which music is defined. fool around with the first few lessons, and you might have an idea as to what an odd time signature is.

that's the best i can start you off with.

[LieLowTheWantedMan]

It is quite complex. The reason I love DT so much is that they can craft really awesome music around odd time signatures like no band I've ever heard.

[Elaitch]

Time signatures... most songs have what's known as a 4/4 pulse. You can count "one, two, three, four" and the pattern will repeat again. If not 4/4, then certainly 3/4 (i.e., "one two three one two three"). It's a simple time signature - easy to dance to, easy to drum to, uses familiar structures, etc.

Listen to a song like Panic Attack, though, and while you can count "one, two, three, four" at first, by the time it gets to the verse you'll find the patterns repeat every five beats. Or, in a more complex song - such as the midsection to Sacrificed Sons - 10, then 9, then 10 again...

Just try and count along with the beats. The melodies don't arrive at regular intervals. It's very much a "feeling" thing - if you wanted, you could argue that every song ever was in 1/4, and start counting "one, one, one," but if you can keep a steady count and recognise where the riffs end, you'll get there.

Essentially this. Another good example is Solitary Shell which has a main riff in a 7/4 time signature. Very prominent (Portnoy even accentuates every hit with the bass drum). "7/4 time signature" means that it has the rhythm of seven quarter-note hits in a bar (like https://i56.tinypic.com/344ckep.png) instead of four quarter-note hits in a bar (4/4) which is widely accepted as a standard time signature.

You could extend that to virtually any combination, however notes are always divided into numbers that are multiples of two (2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 and so on). You'll never find a time signature like 4/3 because there are no "third-notes" in music theory, at least as far as I'm concerned. However the division of quarter-notes, quavers (eigths of a note), semiquavers (sixteenths of a note) and so on, within a bar of hits is virtually unlimited for your convenience. So while a bar can't contain a 4/3 time signature, it can contain and x/2, x/4, x/8, x/16 etc. time signature, where x is any number (however there are rational limits of course, no sane person would write a song in 300/4 time signature, for example... I guess unless you'd like to contain the whole song in one bar x) ). So examples of "odd time signatures" could be 6/8, 15/8, 5/16, 7/8, 9/32 and so on.

So an "odd time signature" is basically a time signature which differs from what is considered a standard one, but does more often than not consist of an uneven number of hits within a bar to give it an "odd" feeling.

[Adami]

On a scale of technicality I'd probably give them a 6 or 7.

[reo73]

They are more complex than popular prog bands like Rush, Queensryche, and Porcupine Tree by far.  They are probably on par with bands like Yes or Steve Morse.  In terms of metal their rhythmic patterns are not as complex as Meshugga but their song structures and solo sections are more complex.  That's not to say they couldn't be that complex rhythmically, they just have never written music in that vein.

In terms of time sigs...listen to the opening riff of Erotomania.  It is really tough to count to and is a prime example of a very odd time signature.  DT tends to use these time signatures in a lot of the middle instrumental passages of their music.

[ricky]

Time signatures... most songs have what's known as a 4/4 pulse. You can count "one, two, three, four" and the pattern will repeat again. If not 4/4, then certainly 3/4 (i.e., "one two three one two three"). It's a simple time signature - easy to dance to, easy to drum to, uses familiar structures, etc.

Listen to a song like Panic Attack, though, and while you can count "one, two, three, four" at first, by the time it gets to the verse you'll find the patterns repeat every five beats. Or, in a more complex song - such as the midsection to Sacrificed Sons - 10, then 9, then 10 again...

Just try and count along with the beats. The melodies don't arrive at regular intervals. It's very much a "feeling" thing - if you wanted, you could argue that every song ever was in 1/4, and start counting "one, one, one," but if you can keep a steady count and recognise where the riffs end, you'll get there.

 However the division of quarter-notes, quavers (eigths of a note), semiquavers (sixteenths of a note) and so on, within a bar of hits is virtually unlimited for your convenience.

technically, it's not "for you convenience". there's no such thing as "convenience" in music theory, only the pulse with which the beat is divided into. granted, in more advanced theory, you can argue the validity of a time signature, but for basic application only a single meter can be used to define a piece of music.



edit -

to continue what i was saying, if a section of music is in 14/8, it's in 14/8. you can subdivide it how you want to, but what you're saying is that basically if something is in 14/8, it's the exact same thing if it were in 7/4, just twice as slow, which isn't the case. for one, there are a ton of variables, but in addition to that, it's technically not how you would properly define it.

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

On a scale of technicality I'd probably give them a 6 or 7.

And what being a 10??

[Adami]

On a scale of technicality I'd probably give them a 6 or 7.

And what being a 10??

I honestly don't listen to a lot of super technical bands, so I don't know any names, but I've heard lots of music that were complex to the point of being unlistenable.


Dream Theater's strength is being complex, but not to the point of making you want to turn it off, they're a great blend of complexity and accessibility.

[orcus116]

There's some tech death that I absolutely could not wrap my head around. 6 or 7 sounds about right.

[Elaitch]

technically, it's not "for you convenience". there's no such thing as "convenience" in music theory, only the pulse with which the beat is divided into. granted, in more advanced theory, you can argue the validity of a time signature, but for basic application only a single meter can be used to define a piece of music.

You may have misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about the pulse-determining part of things, but rather the number of hits in a bar ( 4[<- this]/4 )... I would say there's "convenience" when it comes to that.

[DarkLord_Lalinc]

On a scale of technicality I'd probably give them a 6 or 7.

And what being a 10??

I honestly don't listen to a lot of super technical bands, so I don't know any names, but I've heard lots of music that were complex to the point of being unlistenable.


Dream Theater's strength is being complex, but not to the point of making you want to turn it off, they're a great blend of complexity and accessibility.

Good point.

I take Between the Buried and Me as an example. I like the band, but their compositions can get to the point of me saying "God, way too much"

[Adami]

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

[ricky]

There's some tech death that I absolutely could not wrap my head around. 6 or 7 sounds about right.

tech death, for the most part, is not more technical then dt, albeit from a theoretical point of view. they only present that complexity in a different way, which i discern is what the turn off is.

edit - insted of double posting:

technically, it's not "for you convenience". there's no such thing as "convenience" in music theory, only the pulse with which the beat is divided into. granted, in more advanced theory, you can argue the validity of a time signature, but for basic application only a single meter can be used to define a piece of music.

You may have misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about the pulse-determining part of things, but rather the number of hits in a bar ( 4[<- this]/4 )... I would say there's "convenience" when it comes to that.

right, but it's how you SCORE those four hits in a bar. you could score them as 8 eight notes (8/8), which is mathematically the same thing. you could score it as 16 sixteenth notes (16/16), which also is mathematically the same thing. the difference is that while they are mathematically equivalents, the key is in which note receives the beat. if the pulse is on the quarter note, it's in 4/4, regardless of how you choose to look at it mathematically.

[Arch Benemy]

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

But with talent, a band can make music that is of a 'ten' level of complexity and still have it be listenable and engaging. My example would be Spastic Ink, who are not as fast as the song in that link, but in my opinion are far more technical in terms of using odd meters unusual phrasing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXVgA2Iggz0

[Adami]

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

But with talent, a band can make music that is of a 'ten' level of complexity and still have it be listenable and engaging. My example would be Spastic Ink, who are not as fast as the song in that link, but in my opinion are far more technical in terms of using odd meters unusual phrasing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXVgA2Iggz0

Indeed, I honestly just googled technical bands haha. I had never heard of the band I posted.

[Elaitch]

right, but it's how you SCORE those four hits in a bar. you could score them as 8 eight notes (8/8), which is mathematically the same thing. you could score it as 16 sixteenth notes (16/16), which also is mathematically the same thing. the difference is that while they are mathematically equivalents, the key is in which note receives the beat. if the pulse is on the quarter note, it's in 4/4, regardless of how you choose to look at it mathematically.

While that's true, I can't say I was trying to point out the 4/4 time signature in particular... but would you in extension also say that a 7/4 time signature is essentially a 4/4 in that case, because the pulse is on a quarter note? O.o Even if I get what you're saying, you confuse me slightly as to how it relates to what I'm saying.

[ricky]

right, but it's how you SCORE those four hits in a bar. you could score them as 8 eight notes (8/8), which is mathematically the same thing. you could score it as 16 sixteenth notes (16/16), which also is mathematically the same thing. the difference is that while they are mathematically equivalents, the key is in which note receives the beat. if the pulse is on the quarter note, it's in 4/4, regardless of how you choose to look at it mathematically.

While that's true, I can't say I was trying to point out the 4/4 time signature in particular... but would you in extension also say that a 7/4 time signature is essentially a 4/4 in that case, because the pulse is on a quarter note? O.o Even if I get what you're saying, you confuse me slightly as to how it relates to what I'm saying.

the pulse would be the same, it would still be on the quarter note. the only difference would be in how many quarter notes there are in the bar, i.e. 7 quarter notes = 7/4, 4 quarter notes = 4/4, etc.

[Knguro]

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

But with talent, a band can make music that is of a 'ten' level of complexity and still have it be listenable and engaging. My example would be Spastic Ink, who are not as fast as the song in that link, but in my opinion are far more technical in terms of using odd meters unusual phrasing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXVgA2Iggz0

Indeed, I honestly just googled technical bands haha. I had never heard of the band I posted.

this i will say complexity level 10 and stil enjoyable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwbEi1JRa7w

[Adami]

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

But with talent, a band can make music that is of a 'ten' level of complexity and still have it be listenable and engaging. My example would be Spastic Ink, who are not as fast as the song in that link, but in my opinion are far more technical in terms of using odd meters unusual phrasing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXVgA2Iggz0

Indeed, I honestly just googled technical bands haha. I had never heard of the band I posted.

this i will say complexity level 10 and stil enjoyable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwbEi1JRa7w

Apparently it's too complex to be viewed in my country.

[Knguro]

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

But with talent, a band can make music that is of a 'ten' level of complexity and still have it be listenable and engaging. My example would be Spastic Ink, who are not as fast as the song in that link, but in my opinion are far more technical in terms of using odd meters unusual phrasing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXVgA2Iggz0

Indeed, I honestly just googled technical bands haha. I had never heard of the band I posted.

this i will say complexity level 10 and stil enjoyable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwbEi1JRa7w

Apparently it's too complex to be viewed in my country.

waaaahahahahah sorry Adami song is Chromatic Chimera by Unexpect

[TheMadgician]

There's some tech death that I absolutely could not wrap my head around. 6 or 7 sounds about right.

Could I get some names? I kinda have a taste for ass balls ridiculous tech death.

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

But with talent, a band can make music that is of a 'ten' level of complexity and still have it be listenable and engaging. My example would be Spastic Ink, who are not as fast as the song in that link, but in my opinion are far more technical in terms of using odd meters unusual phrasing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXVgA2Iggz0

I can agree with that. Spastic Ink (and other Jarzombek projects) are ridiculously technical, but much more listenable than other bands that are less (but still very) technical and present it in a less musical format.

[Portrucci]

like others have said, there is plenty of music more technical than prog metal, such as math-rock, mathcore & technical death metal.

complex music can be fun just from trying to imagine how difficult it is to play. But at the end of day its how well it's composed that matters. Nearly anyone can compose some ultra-complex wank session. making it memorable and melodic is another skill altogether.

Could I get some names? I kinda have a taste for ass balls ridiculous tech death.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMWVIYjAx_I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2EbqLtaB6Q

there you go

[orcus116]

There's some tech death that I absolutely could not wrap my head around. 6 or 7 sounds about right.

Could I get some names? I kinda have a taste for ass balls ridiculous tech death.

My roommate showed me the bands so I don't have much experience with them but I recall hearing stuff from Gorguts, Obsurca, Dysrhytmnia, and Necrophagist.

[TheMadgician]

There's some tech death that I absolutely could not wrap my head around. 6 or 7 sounds about right.

Could I get some names? I kinda have a taste for ass balls ridiculous tech death.

My roommate showed me the bands so I don't have much experience with them but I recall hearing stuff from Gorguts, Obsurca, Dysrhytmnia, and Necrophagist.

I actually found Obscura to be much more musical than most tech death. At least on Cosmogenesis. Haven't heard the new one yet. Love Necrophagist, and I haven't gotten around to checking out Gorguts yet. I'll definately look into Dysrhytmnia though. Thanks, bud.

[Arch Benemy]

There's some tech death that I absolutely could not wrap my head around. 6 or 7 sounds about right.

Could I get some names? I kinda have a taste for ass balls ridiculous tech death.

I love me tech death too, here's some more for you that you may or may not have heard

The Faceless
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaoYJLKG03o

Pitbulls in the Nursery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCPwQzNaiuE

Arsis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKOy2yyVlSA

Born of Osiris, more groove than tech but definitely one of the most complex metal bands around at the minute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_rVQiywVw0

Braindrill, one of the most ridiculously tech bands out there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEywYigygnk

OK that's enough derailing, sorry 

[chrisbDTM]

Here's an example of overly complex music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rf7oV453kg&feature=related

But with talent, a band can make music that is of a 'ten' level of complexity and still have it be listenable and engaging. My example would be Spastic Ink, who are not as fast as the song in that link, but in my opinion are far more technical in terms of using odd meters unusual phrasing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXVgA2Iggz0

wow this is pretty cool. deff gotta check out spastic ink now

[ubit]

I am definitely not going to rate DT as a 10, because there are bands (listed here already) that may be more mind-melting, but I subjectively feel that the music I have tried to listen to just now (from those links) are missing what I would call... taste.  Haha that sounds awful, but I guess I personally just need some actual melodic nature to my music.  Some harmony here or there... Those kinds of things. 

I really don't like when a band tries to be complex for no reason other than to be complex.  It seems to have no heart then.  If the ideas in your head turn out to be complex when you write them out, so be it.  But bands like this Spastic Ink seem to be complex for no reason.  I actually am intrigued by it, but I'm not sure how genuine it seems to me.  It is hard to explain. 

[TheMadgician]

There's some tech death that I absolutely could not wrap my head around. 6 or 7 sounds about right.

Could I get some names? I kinda have a taste for ass balls ridiculous tech death.

I love me tech death too, here's some more for you that you may or may not have heard

The Faceless
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaoYJLKG03o

Pitbulls in the Nursery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCPwQzNaiuE

Arsis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKOy2yyVlSA

Born of Osiris, more groove than tech but definitely one of the most complex metal bands around at the minute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_rVQiywVw0

Braindrill, one of the most ridiculously tech bands out there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEywYigygnk

OK that's enough derailing, sorry 

I hadn't heard of Pitbulls. Oh man this is great.

You might want to check out After the Burial. Prog/tech deathcore similar to BoO. All I'm gonna say is breakdown with the rhythm based on Pi.

I'd also reccomend Fleshgod Apocalypse, Lykathea Aflame, and Augury. Though the last two are more proggy than techy. All great though.

[Arch Benemy]

Love After the Burial. That breakdown halfway through Berzerker, I was walking down the street when I first heard that and I swear I stopped dead in my tracks and replayed it about 10 times haha. Is there are complex/technical music thread? Someone should start one for more band sharing

[chrisbDTM]

ill do it

[lithium112]

In terms of "how difficult their stuff is to play" I would rate DT like a 7 like some others have said, but in terms of being able to use technicality well, I would seriously give them a 10.

If you're looking for a super techy band, check out Behold... The Arctopus. This is one of their more listenable songs imo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4OrOdgt7nc

[SnakeEyes]

In order to answer this question, there must first be made a distinction between "complex" and "technical."  DT's music is technically difficult to play.  I would say that, overall, DT's music is not extremely complex, but rather technical.