"Modern" Era?

[Perpetual Change]

Not to be nit-picky, but after looking at the "favorite modern DT album thread" I thought it'd be interesting to read how people view the different eras of DT.

For me, I gotta say that I no longer think of albums like Scenes and Six Degrees as "modern" DT. In my eyes, that line-up (Petrucci, Myung, Portnoy, Labrie, Rudess) is what I think of as "classic" DT, while the other big line-up (Petrucci, Myung, Portnoy, Moore, LaBrie) is more like "early" DT and the line-up we have now is either the new "modern" DT or another transitional phase (a'la the line ups that featured Dominici and Sherinian). What I'm more ambivalent on, though, is the question of when exactly "classic" DT ends. Part of me thinks it's obviously with the departure of Mike, but on the other hand the release of Score has also always sort of represented the end of an era for me.

Of course, we can always do things the Deep Purple way and just consider this "Dream Theater Mach V." Then, obviously, there's the people who consider every album/tour cycle to be an "era."

Anyway, I'm just curious to see how the way people have looked and the band's history has changed as time's gone by. Looking forward to reading some other takes on the various "eras" of DT.

[GasparXR]

Not to be nit-picky, but after looking at the "favorite modern DT album thread" I thought it'd be interesting to read how people view the different eras of DT.

For me, I gotta say that I no longer think of albums like Scenes and Six Degrees as "modern" DT. In my eyes, that line-up (Petrucci, Myung, Portnoy, Labrie, Rudess) is what I think of as "classic" DT, while the other big line-up (Petrucci, Myung, Portnoy, Moore, LaBrie) is more like "early" DT and the line-up we have now is either the new "modern" DT or another transitional phase (a'la the line ups that featured Dominici and Sherinian). What I'm more ambivalent on, though, is the question of when exactly "classic" DT ends. Part of me thinks it's obviously with the departure of Mike, but on the other hand the release of Score has also always sort of represented the end of an era for me.

Of course, we can always do things the Deep Purple way and just consider this "Dream Theater Mach V." Then, obviously, there's the people who consider every album/tour cycle to be an "era."

Anyway, I'm just curious to see how the way people have looked and the band's history has changed as time's gone by. Looking forward to reading some other takes on the various "eras" of DT.

To me there's four major eras. There's the Majesty era, from 1985 until Charlie was replaced by LaBrie. Then there's the 90s-DT era, including I&W, Awake, and FII. Then there's the early 2000s, era, consisting of SFAM, SDOIT, TOT and 8VM. Then there's the METUHL era, with SC and BCSL. I guess ADTOE would begin a fifth era from what I can tell.

[BlobVanDam]

The line gets blurrier the further we get along, because if we're only dividing it into "old" and "modern", that line is going to change. Until recently you could call SFAM modern DT based on just a 50/50 split of years/albums, and it made complete sense given the clear change of lineup and sound.

But now that we're in 2011, it's getting less accurate to call a 12 year old album the "modern" era. At this point I think simply splitting into two eras is getting too inaccurate to mean anything.

At this point I don't like to try and say what album is what era, but in time I think there will be early JR era, from SFAM onwards, then either the RR era from SC onwards, or maybe in time we'll have the MM era, if the changes in DT prove to continue and become even more apparent.

[GasparXR]

The line gets blurrier the further we get along, because if we're only dividing it into "old" and "modern", that line is going to change. Until recently you could call SFAM modern DT based on just a 50/50 split of years/albums, and it made complete sense given the clear change of lineup and sound.

But now that we're in 2011, it's getting less accurate to call a 12 year old album the "modern" era. At this point I think simply splitting into two eras is getting too inaccurate to mean anything.

At this point I don't like to try and say what album is what era, but in time I think there will be early JR era, from SFAM onwards, then either the RR era from SC onwards, or maybe in time we'll have the MM era, if the changes in DT prove to continue and become even more apparent.

And of course, you already know what defines a new era by the change in music style from the previous albums :x

[Perpetual Change]

At this point I don't like to try and say what album is what era, but in time I think there will be early JR era, from SFAM onwards, then either the RR era from SC onwards, or maybe in time we'll have the MM era, if the changes in DT prove to continue and become even more apparent.

That's a good point. Until Mike left, I'd consider post-Score DT to be an era separate from SFAM-8va. But, since Mike leaving was more significant than then obvious change in tone that accompanied of SC, I now find it a lot easier to extend what I consider to be "classic" dt to cover those two albums as well.

Watch the band break-up one day and then reform 5 years later, making the whole entire run from 1986-2011 look like one big "Classic" era.

[Zook]

WDADU -> Awake: Era 1
ACOS -> SDOIT: Era 2
TOT -> BC&SL: Era 3
ADTOE and Beyond: Era 4

[Ħ]

WDADU -> Awake
ACOS -> FII
SFAM -> SDOIT
TOT -> BCSL
ADTOE -> onward

That's how I would break it up.

[hefdaddy42]

Majesty - WDADU
I&W - Awake
ACOS - FII
SFAM - BC&SL

[Mladen]

Majesty - WDADU
I&W - Awake
ACOS - FII
SFAM - BC&SL

ATDOE - future

[IdoSC]

Majesty - SFAM
SDOIT - BCSL
ADTOE -

[Cable]

At this point I don't like to try and say what album is what era, but in time I think there will be early JR era, from SFAM onwards, then either the RR era from SC onwards, or maybe in time we'll have the MM era, if the changes in DT prove to continue and become even more apparent.

This is close to how I feel. Cliched, but I think the best way to really break down the eras is by members. Now, that does leave a noticeable grey area with the last 3 or so albums. But the albums so far with new members have sounded different than the prior one. And so far, it looks like ADTOE will sound different than the last album.

Like I said, the last few albums sound different then the prior ones with a new member (JR). But i think many would agree that SC and BC&SL do not fall far from the TOT tree. And one song (TGP) and a part of another (TTTSTA) do sound like a lot of what was to come. Even further, we could say that many ideas of SFAM were hashed out prior to JR already, knowing what we do from the Met. Pt.2 demo.

The outlier is 8V. Some songs can stick with the TOT style though. But with SFAM and 8V (semi) being concept albums, those can stick out in direction.

So for me, minus the constant members, and on new members basically...
CD
JLB
DS
JR
MM

[fibreoptix]

I'd probably throw into the mix that SFAM - 8V could be considered an era of it's own... that being the 'meta-album' era.

[Metropolis Pt. II]

Majesty - WDADU
I&W - Awake
ACOS - FII
SFAM - BC&SL

I agree.

[The Presence of Frenemies]

At this point I don't like to try and say what album is what era, but in time I think there will be early JR era, from SFAM onwards, then either the RR era from SC onwards, or maybe in time we'll have the MM era, if the changes in DT prove to continue and become even more apparent.

This is close to how I feel. Cliched, but I think the best way to really break down the eras is by members. Now, that does leave a noticeable grey area with the last 3 or so albums. But the albums so far with new members have sounded different than the prior one. And so far, it looks like ADTOE will sound different than the last album.

Like I said, the last few albums sound different then the prior ones with a new member (JR). But i think many would agree that SC and BC&SL do not fall far from the TOT tree. And one song (TGP) and a part of another (TTTSTA) do sound like a lot of what was to come. Even further, we could say that many ideas of SFAM were hashed out prior to JR already, knowing what we do from the Met. Pt.2 demo.

The outlier is 8V. Some songs can stick with the TOT style though. But with SFAM and 8V (semi) being concept albums, those can stick out in direction.

So for me, minus the constant members, and on new members basically...
CD
JLB
DS
JR
MM

This identifies one sort of sticking point with the eras, which is TOT/8V. To me, everything from the start to SDOIT is at least somewhat stylistically similar (which is why those are the albums that always get praised as being "true DT" or whatever). So, that's not a big deal--you can break it down by keyboard players, singers, record label oversight, or just lump them all into one "classic era" plausibly.

But then there's a switch to a very metallic sound on TOT, followed by a switch to a very melodic, almost prog-pop (if there is such a thing) sound for 8V.

The Roadrunner duo are pretty easily lumped together into one "late-MP" era, particularly due to the release of Score, which "closes the chapter" before it. ADTOE will almost certainly start a new one itself--if it didn't by default based on MP's departure, the snippets sure reinforce it sonically.

So 1985-2002 is pretty easy to classify, and 2007-10 is as well, but there's that 2003-06 era that's sort of weird because DT went from their most progressive (SFAM/SDOIT) to their most metal (TOT) to their most melodic (8V).

So it's difficult to label that timespan. I guess the best I can do is this:

1985-98--"Classic" DT: The phase where they started out, became big, but then started to get stale toward the end (partially due to the label) and thus needed to change things up.
1999-06--"Transitional" DT: Here, the band hires JR and records four albums that push the boundaries of their sound. The first two simply take their old prog formula and push it to extremes, while the next two isolate other elements of their sound and push those elements to the forefront.
2007-10--"Modernized" DT: The band gets a new label and starts making extremely polished-sounding but slightly more one-dimensional music that sounds like a metallic consolidation of everything on the previous four albums.
2011-?--Current DT: The band gets its biggest overall shakeup. As for the music? We're about to find out.

[ReaPsTA]

It depends on how you look at it.  Musically, it's really easy:

Old School:  WDADU - FII  (All these albums sound like young guys playing music because... they were young guys playing music)
Rudess Enters:   SFaM - 8vm  (The DT sound is honed in with Rudess added.  Instrumental breaks, heaviness, crazy experiments, and so on)
Signing with Roadrunner:  SC - BCSL  (DT becomes an institution.  All the success is there, and they get heavier and darker to keep up with the times)
Mangini Enters:  ADTOE  (Portnoy leaves, DT has to rebuild)

But in a broader sense, well, it depends on how you look at it.  DT's made a major shift in some way with almost every album.  But if you want to look at the eras in terms of their careers, I think there's only one way to do it.

Breaking in:  WDADU - I&W
Struggles and Success:  Awake - SFaM
Building the DT Brand:  6DOIT - 8vm
Roadrunner:  SC - BCSL
Mangini:  ADTOE

And here's why I think it works.  Even though they had gotten LaBrie and signed a new record deal after WDADU, DT didn't become a valuable property to anyone (including themselves), until Pull Me Under hit.

From there, the next three albums were a constant struggle.  KM leaves, the record label interferes with FII, DS is fired, MP almost leaves (unlike now, this might have sunk them), they bring in Jordan and hope that Scenes will succeed.

People think of Rudess joining the band as the beginning of a new era, but that's not really true.  If Scenes hadn't succeeded, their careers might have been irrevocably destroyed after FII cost them so much credibility.  Two flops in a row?  Very, very bad.  The success of Scenes was what transformed their careers.  They got complete creative freedom and solidified the fanbase's trust in them.*

The next three albums were more or less an effort to maintain that success.  Now that they had a legitimate dedicated fan base and the creative freedom to maintain it, DT's relations with the fans and the expectations of their music were created.  Evening With shows, increased internet presence and experimentation with the music within a specific style which allows you to go from Blind Faith to As I Am to I Walk Beside you without giving the fans a sense of whiplash.  Then the Atlantic contract runs out, Score is made, an era ends.

What's strange here is this is where the musical and career eras converge.  Falling Into Infinity was made under completely different circumstances than Awake, and the music shows it, but fundamentally it's still guys in their 20's making music.  Different place in their careers, but the music still spoke of youth.

Once they started with Systematic Chaos, they were in a place where their careers were doing amazingly and the music reflects that level of comfort.  SC, based on the CiP documentary, was basically made without any real distress.  Black Clouds reflected the necessary career/business move of making a "DT" album rather than an album with a specific focus like SFaM (concept album), 6DOIT (experimental album), ToT (dark and heavy), 8vm (pop/prog), SC (balls).  Business and art merged.

And then Portnoy left, which again blew up everything.  It's still hard to put this era into context without hearing the album, but we can say for certain we're in the middle of a seismic shift in DT history.

---------

*In retrospect, it's amazing how much pressure was put on Rudess.  Mangini has big shoes to fill, but JP/JR/JM/JLB have done everything possible to take care of him and ease him into the band and the fan base.  Rudess had to come in and reinvent DT's keyboard style for the second time in two albums, and if he failed the band might have sunk.  Aside from being in the band for over a decade, I can see why Rudess so obviously carries himself as "the" DT keyboardist.  He's as much a part of what DT is today as JP/JM/JLB.  Mangini hasn't had this moment yet, it will be interesting to see if he does.

[BlobVanDam]

People think of Rudess joining the band as the beginning of a new era, but that's not really true.  If Scenes hadn't succeeded, their careers might have been irrevocably destroyed after FII cost them so much credibility.  Two flops in a row?  Very, very bad.  The success of Scenes was what transformed their careers.  They got complete creative freedom and solidified the fanbase's trust in them.*

I disagree. I definitely see JR joining, and the other points you mentioned, as the beginning of the new era, and not the end of the previous one. I think that new creative freedom shown on SFAM, and the new sound from JR shows a big change that signifies the start of the next phase of their careers, clearly separating it from FII, and what came before. Had it flopped, it would still have kept those distinctions, even if it didn't develop into what we now consider the "modern" era.

I totally see what you're getting at and how you're approaching it, but imo it stood apart from the previous era even including the circumstances surrounding it. And personally I see the musical differences and lineup as more important aspects to define era, even if it's not always a clear cut distinction.

[GasparXR]

Reapsta, you said Mangini left in your post.

[ReaPsTA]

Reapsta, you said Mangini left in your post.

Well, you heard it here first!

I disagree. I definitely see JR joining, and the other points you mentioned, as the beginning of the new era, and not the end of the previous one. I think that new creative freedom shown on SFAM, and the new sound from JR shows a big change that signifies the start of the next phase of their careers, clearly separating it from FII, and what came before. Had it flopped, it would still have kept those distinctions, even if it didn't develop into what we now consider the "modern" era.

I totally see what you're getting at and how you're approaching it, but imo it stood apart from the previous era even including the circumstances surrounding it. And personally I see the musical differences and lineup as more important aspects to define era, even if it's not always a clear cut distinction.

In terms of DT's music, I completely agree with you.  And if you're putting more emphasis on the music, then yeah, Scenes is definitely a beginning rather than an ending.

[Evo]

1- Pre James La Brie

2 - I&W - SFAM

I've always thought of Six Degrees as a transitional album

3 - ToT - BC&SL

4 - MP's departure/ADTOE onwards

[Jirpo]

I would say up to and including SFAM as the first era. 6DOIT -> BC&SL is their modern era to me, their modern sound.  ADTOE and MP's departure start a new era.

[SnakeEyes]

I think some of these are way off.... just my opinion.  Here's what I think:

Classic DT:  1985-SFAM

Modern DT:  SFAM-Black Clouds

New era DT:  obviously, the new album

SFAM, in my opinion, overlaps "classic DT" and "modern DT" because they still had a huge part of the old style, BUT a) started producing their own albums with this one and b) started getting a lot heavier and more "shreddy"