On the Backs of Angels Thread

[tri.ad]

I'll tell you what I like the most about this song: the instrumentals don't sound like wankery.  I've gotten so used to those guitar-keyboard tradeoffs, and maybe they're actually in there, but I don't notice them if they are because they don't sound the way they have for the last four albums.

That's definitely a very nice change, I agree. But still, I think that there will still be at least two or three songs on the album who feature the trade-off sections; however, if they aren't as samey as they were on the last few albums, it will be definitely a big step up.

[j]

I'll tell you what I like the most about this song: the instrumentals don't sound like wankery.  I've gotten so used to those guitar-keyboard tradeoffs, and maybe they're actually in there, but I don't notice them if they are because they don't sound the way they have for the last four albums.

I completely agree.  Nothing sounds like it's there just for the sake of being there.

-J

[Super Dude]

I'll tell you what I like the most about this song: the instrumentals don't sound like wankery.  I've gotten so used to those guitar-keyboard tradeoffs, and maybe they're actually in there, but I don't notice them if they are because they don't sound the way they have for the last four albums.

That's definitely a very nice change, I agree. But still, I think that there will still be at least two or three songs on the album who feature the trade-off sections; however, if they aren't as samey as they were on the last few albums, it will be definitely a big step up.

Maybe there will be, I don't know, but I think every album since ToT has had at least one in the first song, haven't they?

[tri.ad]

ITPOE Pt.1 didn't have it, but I can see what you mean. Let's just hope that OTBOA sets the tone/mood for the whole album regarding this whole structural thing.

[Super Dude]

ITPOE Pt.1 didn't have it, but I can see what you mean. Let's just hope that OTBOA sets the tone/mood for the whole album regarding this whole structural thing.

Yeah, just the point that I have to go listen to the song now to check ought to prove my point.

[chaotic_ripper]

I'm starting to feel like this is their best song in a decade.  Yes, I'm very sure it is.

[Metrovarium]

I'm starting to feel like this is their best song in a decade.  Yes, I'm very sure it is.

I think you're forgetting that the decade includes songs like Octavarium, The Count of Tuscany, and all of the songs in the 12-Step Suite.

[chaotic_ripper]

I'm starting to feel like this is their best song in a decade.  Yes, I'm very sure it is.

I think you're forgetting that the decade includes songs like Octavarium, The Count of Tuscany, and all of the songs in the 12-Step Suite.

Sorry but no, I didn't forget about any of those.

[Ultimetalhead]

While I don't think it's their best song in a decade, it's certainly one of their better songs.

And it's easily their best single since Pull Me Under.

[Jarlaxle]

Definitely the best start to an album since Pull Me Under.

[JPX]

I'm starting to feel like this is their best song in a decade.  Yes, I'm very sure it is.

Good for you.

[Super Dude]

And the last five minutes or so of ItPoE pt. 2.

[Dream Team]

I'm liking OTBOA more and more. That new mix is killer. Definitely a Top 10 song from the last 4 albums.

[ariich]

I'll tell you what I like the most about this song: the instrumentals don't sound like wankery.  I've gotten so used to those guitar-keyboard tradeoffs, and maybe they're actually in there, but I don't notice them if they are because they don't sound the way they have for the last four albums.

That's definitely a very nice change, I agree. But still, I think that there will still be at least two or three songs on the album who feature the trade-off sections; however, if they aren't as samey as they were on the last few albums, it will be definitely a big step up.

I'm so bored of this complaint. BC&SL only had two trade-off sections, so the fact that OTBOA doesn't have one is not remotely surprising or shocking.

[Super Dude]

Maybe it was only a couple, but the minute I hear one on a new album I just go, "Oh come on, not this shit again." It's like a way overused joke; just plain annoying now.

[ariich]

But there's always been some use of it on DT albums, why would it suddenly start annoying you?

[chrisbDTM]

and luckily JP wasnt too fond of it either during the BC&SL writing sessions. its in one of the studio vids on youtube

JP liked how in UAGM him and kev had seperate solo sections, instead of soloing over the same riff. (him and MP were arguing over the AROP solo sections)

[ReaPsTA]

I'm so bored of this complaint. BC&SL only had two trade-off sections,

Two trade-off sections out of six tracks, meaning one trade-off solo every three tracks.  Compared to DT's other most recent albums:

BCSL - 1:3
SC - 1:4
8vm -  1:4
ToT -  1:2.33
6DOIT -  1:7
SFaM - 1:6

So, relatively speaking, BCSL had quite a few trade off solos.

[Super Dude]

I mean it always kinda did, but at the time I became a fan 8vm had just been released, so I figured lightning don't strike in the same place twice, right? So I was able to tolerate it in TROAE for instance. Then Constant Motion came out. While that tradeoff wasn't really that bad (and I have to admit it does kinda add to the oomph of the song in a good way), I did get this feeling like, "And there goes Spongebob! ...Ripping his pants...again." Know what I mean?

[ReaPsTA]

I mean it always kinda did, but at the time I became a fan 8vm had just been released, so I figured lightning don't strike in the same place twice, right? So I was able to tolerate it in TROAE for instance. Then Constant Motion came out. While that tradeoff wasn't really that bad (and I have to admit it does kinda add to the oomph of the song in a good way), I did get this feeling like, "And there goes Spongebob! ...Ripping his pants...again." Know what I mean?

I just want to know if it's good.  I like the keyboard > guitar pass off in TMOLS for example.  Same with TROAE.

[Super Dude]

I'd like to add that the CM section is the only instance I enjoy listening to, and probably more for the effect it adds to the song rather than on its own merit.

[ReaPsTA]

I'd like to add that the CM section is the only instance I enjoy listening to, and probably more for the effect it adds to the song rather than on its own merit.

I think that's fair.  The rush out of both of those solos is pretty cool.

[Super Dude]

Also, call me crazy, but I don't like TMoLS.

[ReaPsTA]

Also, call me crazy, but I don't like TMoLS.

A lot of people don't.

[Super Dude]

Oh, good.

[ReaPsTA]

Oh, good.

Well, um...

I'd have more to say except I don't get it.  I see tons of great melodies, an instrumental section that actually works, two of JP's best guitar solos, very good lyrics, and one of the most powerful final acts of any DT song.  Apparently a lot of people see boringness and a jarring instrumental section.  Which is weird to me.  One of the only DT instrumental sections I really like is one of the only ones that everyone else doesn't.  Meeehhh.

[Super Dude]

Oh, the song just depresses me is all.

[ariich]

I'm so bored of this complaint. BC&SL only had two trade-off sections,

Two trade-off sections out of six tracks, meaning one trade-off solo every three tracks.  Compared to DT's other most recent albums:

BCSL - 1:3
SC - 1:4
8vm -  1:4
ToT -  1:2.33
6DOIT -  1:7
SFaM - 1:6

So, relatively speaking, BCSL had quite a few trade off solos.

That's a pretty silly way to look at it considering it only goes by number of tracks and ignores song lengths. A better way to look at it is two trade-offs out of 75ish minutes, same as SC, Octavarium, ToT and SFAM.

[ReaPsTA]

That's a pretty silly way to look at it considering it only goes by number of tracks and ignores song lengths. A better way to look at it is two trade-offs out of 75ish minutes, same as SC, Octavarium, ToT and SFAM.

I'm more interested in songs than albums though for the most part.  For me, if I don't like a song, I tend to avoid it.  On an album like Scenes this isn't so bad, since there are twelve songs to choose from.  But on an album like Black Clouds, if I don't like a song, well, all the sudden my options get pretty limited.

Also, I don't tend to take in moments in isolation.  If I don't like something in a song, the whole thing suffers for me.  Everything before the bad moment is leading up to it, and everything afterwards lacks punch because it's not based on something cool.

I guess what I don't understand is that in a universe where everything is subjective anyway, you're saying it rubs you the wrong way when people say there are a lot of trade-offs in BCSL, a concept you can mathematically validate.  Why is your way of looking at it better?

[ariich]

Actually mathematically you can't validate it, as I pointed out. I agree that it's subjective, but the mathematical fact is that there are no more trade-offs on BC&SL than on almost all their other JR-era albums. If it affects you for some other reason, fine, but the shock at OTBOA not having one makes no sense.

[ReaPsTA]

Actually mathematically you can't validate it, as I pointed out. I agree that it's subjective, but the mathematical fact is that there are no more trade-offs on BC&SL than on almost all their other JR-era albums. If it affects you for some other reason, fine, but the shock at OTBOA not having one makes no sense.

Why not.  I'm saying that out of all the Rudess-era albums, BCSL has a higher amount of trade-off solos per song.  What's not true about that sentence?  And why is it silly for me to find that relevant?  It indicates that in DT's most recent songwriting they were more willing to go to that kind of solo section.

I will agree with you and say that I'm not sure why anyone would be shocked about the lack of a trade-off solo in OTBOA.

[ACID_FOX]

Again, only on this board will you find people that attempt to validate their musical opinions via mathematical equations.

[ariich]

Maybe it's because you're a song-listener and I'm an album-listener, but I just don't see that as a logical way to approach it at all. I don't think it's silly for you to find the concept in general to be relevant, I guess I just find the way you define it to not make much sense.

[Nick]

I find Rich has approached this from a much more solid perspective, scientifically, and while what Reapsta said is certainly true he has intentionally set up his experiment to come up with the desired results.

I mean look at it this way, I might say that album A has two amazing tracks, and album B has three amazing tracks. However if all songs on album A are 20 minutes long, and all songs on album B are 5 minutes long then there is an issue. I am misrepresenting my overall feelings on the album by simplifying the process and qualities I am using to judge them by. While it's true that both albums have two amazing tracks, but ignoring other factors I am making it seem like I enjoy them equally, when it is obvious I'd actually enjoy album A more.

[Super Dude]

Well...

you smell like poo.