Your Controversial Opinions on DT

[mikeyd23]

Most of the percieved differences are due to the volume of MM's drums being mixed quieter than MP's. The psychological effect of louder = better reigns supreme.  That's why something like the drum break of 'In The Air Tonight' is so revered, it's nothing special, it's just mixed LOUD

No. The perceived difference is that they play quite differently from each.

I agree Adami, but I also think part of the perceived difference definitely has something to do with the drum sounds on the MM records vs the MP records, volume included.

The perceived difference in volume is due to volume. The perceived difference in style and preference is due to a difference in style in preference. I just don't like this narrative of "Well if you don't like MM's drumming, it's cause of the recording/volume and it can't POSSIBLY because you don't like what he's doing."

Oh yea, I totally agree with that.

[lucasembarbosa]

Not related to the present controversy discussion...

I really enjoy the background vocal harmonies on the latter MP albums, mostly in Forsaken, Repentance ending, Prophets of War, ANtR and the Queen cover on BC&SL. Wish DT would bring back live backing vocals including other members and do more of these harmonies like "In peaceful sedation I lay half awake..." in their new songs.

[Max Kuehnau]

Take The Time is redundant on I&W (otherwise a good album concerning the songwriting, not the drumming IMHO, I just never understood why TTT is on I/W, too simplistic)

[gzarruk]

I really like TTT, but the low point on IAW, to me, is Surrounded. Don’t know how it was included instead of something like TLF or DLPM.

[DTA]

I really like TTT, but the low point on IAW, to me, is Surrounded. Don’t know how it was included instead of something like TLF or DLPM.

Surrounded and TTT are not my favorite songs, but they are perfect representations of the early DT sound. Another Day is the weak point of I&W imo. I like the song enough, but it sounds like a cheesy 80’s power ballad. TLF would’ve been a way better choice.

[bosk1]

Take The Time is redundant on I&W (otherwise a good album concerning the songwriting, not the drumming IMHO, I just never understood why TTT is on I/W, too simplistic)

I don't care for the song either, but "redundant" makes no sense in that context.  I have no idea what you are trying to say.

[ChuckSteak]

There is no low point on I&W, you heretics!

[Max Kuehnau]

Take The Time is redundant on I&W (otherwise a good album concerning the songwriting, not the drumming IMHO, I just never understood why TTT is on I/W, too simplistic)

I don't care for the song either, but "redundant" makes no sense in that context.  I have no idea what you are trying to say.

my choice of words might have been awkward yes, that does happen although my English is a lot better than my German. Anyway, I do think TTT stands out for being slightly "out of place" as it were as compared to the other pieces on I/W IMHO (might have been a good fit on FII and not as vitally important a piece as say Met1 on I/W), because of some things that happen in the piece. (verse groove, keyboard comping patterns in the guitar solo section and some other things). I never liked the piece either, but that again is my opinion and I respect anyone's. (I'm not trying to be mean here. Never.)

[pg1067]

I really like TTT, but the low point on IAW, to me, is Surrounded. Don’t know how it was included instead of something like TLF or DLPM.

Wow...I love "Surrounded" (and TTT -- "too simplistic"?!?!).  It's worlds better than either TLF or DLPM (the latter, in particular, is a particularly substandard track for DT and easy to understand why it ended up on the scrap heap.  It was easily the low point of the I&W&B show I saw last year.

As for TLF, when they played it on the Music in Progress tour, I assumed it was an unfinished song that might show up on the next album (Awake).  When it didn't, I forgot about it for a good long time (probably until I got the Making of I&W "bootleg" or WDaDRu).  It still feels like an incomplete song, and I think I&W would have been a lesser album if it had been included instead of "Surrounded."

But hey, opinions!

For me, the low point of I&W is UaGM.  And, while I liked it at the time, I usually also skip "Another Day," but that's mostly because I'm excited to get to TTT, "Surrounded" and "Metropolis."

[gzarruk]

It’s funny that we all think one song or the other is the low point of IAW, and none of us agree on which
I think my main problem with Surrounded is that it’s the one that sounds dated the most, the rest hold up just fine.

Btw, IAW is one of those albums where it’s hard for me to pick my top 5 songs. My top 4 are definitely Metropolis, LTL, UAGM and TTT, but I just can’t settle on the 5th. Depending on my mood, it’s PMU or WFS, and sometimes even AD.

[bosk1]

In my opinion, the songs would go:

Great:
-PMU
-Metropolis
-WFS
-LTL

Good:
-UAGM

Okay:
-Surrounded

Don't care for:
-TTT
-AD

[MirrorMask]

In my opinion, the songs would go:

Great:
Pull Me Under
Another Day
Take the Time
Surrounded
Metropolis–Part I: "The Miracle and the Sleeper"
Under a Glass Moon
Wait for Sleep
Learning to Live

[pg1067]

I&W songs:

Great
Metropolis
WFS/LTL (hard for me to separate WFS as anything other than an intro/prelude to LTL)
TTT

Really good
Surrounded

Good
PMU

Less Good
AD
UAGM

[The Walrus]

Controversial opinion: the FII demos aren't good, the final product is infinitely superior, Raise the Knife is not good, You Or Me is inferior to You Not Me, Hell's Kitchen is better on its own, the guest singers make the music better, etc.

[MirrorMask]

Controversial opinion: the FII demos aren't good, the final product is infinitely superior, Raise the Knife is not good, You Or Me is inferior to You Not Me, Hell's Kitchen is better on its own, the guest singers make the music better, etc.

I agree with everything except the Raise the Knife bit.

[Adami]

Controversial opinion: the FII demos aren't good, the final product is infinitely superior, Raise the Knife is not good, You Or Me is inferior to You Not Me, Hell's Kitchen is better on its own, the guest singers make the music better, etc.

I agree with everything except the Raise the Knife bit.

Yup, but the wrongness of the RTK opinion actually discredits the rest of it somehow.

[The Walrus]

RTK is boring as all get out. I just watched it on the Score DVD and these days I wish it wasn't even on it tbh. Would've rather had an actual FII song played.

[pg1067]

Controversial opinion: the FII demos aren't good, the final product is infinitely superior, Raise the Knife is not good, You Or Me is inferior to You Not Me, Hell's Kitchen is better on its own, the guest singers make the music better, etc.

I generally agree (although I rank FII in the bottom three of DT's albums).

I first heard "Raise the Knife" when I got the Score DVD back in 2006.  I probably only watched/listened to it once or twice because I usually start with the orchestra tracks (and the bonus stuff on disc 2) when I watch Score.  I sought out the Cleaning Out the Closet version not to long ago when I saw a bunch of folks here fawning over it.  I agree that it's pretty boring.

There's a reason why songs like RTK, "To Live Forever" and "Don't Look Past Me" were cast onto the scrap heap.

I definitely agree that You Not Me >>> You or Me.

Not sure what you mean about the guest singers, but the Doug Pinnick part of "Lines in the Sand" might be the worst thing about FII.

I don't think I've ever heard "Burning My Soul" with "Hell's Kitchen" in the middle, but I think HK is just fine on its own (and am not a big fan of BMS), so I likely agree with you on that.

[gzarruk]

Controversial opinion: the FII demos aren't good, the final product is infinitely superior, Raise the Knife is not good, You Or Me is inferior to You Not Me, Hell's Kitchen is better on its own, the guest singers make the music better, etc.

I agree with everything except the Raise the Knife bit.

Same here. I can live without CME, WAYN, STM and TWIUTB, but RTK is better than most songs on the actual FII.

YNM is definitely better than YOM. BMS works better without HK in it and so on.

Doug Pinnick ruined LITS, though.

[commanderbob]

In my opinion, the songs would go:

Great:
-PMU
-Metropolis
-WFS
-LTL

Good:
-UAGM

Okay:
-Surrounded

Don't care for:
-TTT
-AD

Great:
-PMU
-Metropolis
-WFS
-LTL
-UAGM
-Surrounded

Don't care for:
-TTT
-AD

[The Walrus]

Not sure what you mean about the guest singers, but the Doug Pinnick part of "Lines in the Sand" might be the worst thing about FII.

Typo, my fault - singer, not singers. I love that part of LITS, it's one of my favorite moments of the album honestly.

[erwinrafael]

I really like TTT, but the low point on IAW, to me, is Surrounded. Don’t know how it was included instead of something like TLF or DLPM.

Take The Time is redundant on I&W (otherwise a good album concerning the songwriting, not the drumming IMHO, I just never understood why TTT is on I/W, too simplistic)

So I am the guy whose favorites in I&W are Surrounded and TTT. :-P

The low point of that album is Learning To Live. That is the one that really sounds dated. Good think they finally got it right with Breaking All Illusions.

[Dublagent66]

The low point of that album is Learning To Live. That is the one that really sounds dated. Good think they finally got it right with Breaking All Illusions.

LOL LTL ....and how did they finally get it right with all that great material in between?  Not to mention that BAI should've been the album closer.

The title of the thread is "controversial" not flat out ridiculous.  What you said makes no sense.

[The Walrus]

No need to call that opinion ridiculous. It's controversial, perhaps, but not ridiculous. LTL does sound dated, particularly because of 'the 90s bring new questions' lyric.

Take the Time freaking rules.

[pg1067]

The low point of that album is Learning To Live. That is the one that really sounds dated. Good think they finally got it right with Breaking All Illusions.

LOL LTL ....and how did they finally get it right with all that great material in between?  Not to mention that BAI should've been the album closer.

The title of the thread is "controversial" not flat out ridiculous.  What you said makes no sense.

 

[MirrorMask]

The low point of that album is Learning To Live. That is the one that really sounds dated. Good think they finally got it right with Breaking All Illusions.

LOL LTL ....and how did they finally get it right with all that great material in between?  Not to mention that BAI should've been the album closer.

The title of the thread is "controversial" not flat out ridiculous.  What you said makes no sense.

Well, he most likely was thinking about how some songs (not all) on Dramatic mirror quite closely, in structure, the songs off Images and Words. Breaking All Illusions is quite clearly inspired by Learing to Live's structure, so we can see it as a 21th century version of LtL. Just like On the Backs of Angels' structure is inspired by Pull Me Under's.

[ToT-147]

It’s funny that we all think one song or the other is the low point of IAW, and none of us agree on which

To me it's even funnier to know that while I think WFS is by far the worst song of I&W, no one seem to be mentioning it and, on the contrary, I know it's actually liked a lot.. The song is in my bottom three DT songs, along with Just Let Me Breathe and New Millenium...

But yeah, I think this fan disagreement happens with every DT album..

There's a reason why songs like RTK, "To Live Forever" and "Don't Look Past Me" were cast onto the scrap heap.

Yes, because the label wanted it..

[KevShmev]

No need to call that opinion ridiculous. It's controversial, perhaps, but not ridiculous. LTL does sound dated, particularly because of 'the 90s bring new questions' lyric.

Take the Time freaking rules.

What does that even mean?

[erwinrafael]

The low point of that album is Learning To Live. That is the one that really sounds dated. Good think they finally got it right with Breaking All Illusions.

The title of the thread is "controversial" not flat out ridiculous.  What you said makes no sense.

Show me a post-early 1990s song that has the vibe of that keyboard intro and the song's outro.

[The Walrus]

No need to call that opinion ridiculous. It's controversial, perhaps, but not ridiculous. LTL does sound dated, particularly because of 'the 90s bring new questions' lyric.

Take the Time freaking rules.

What does that even mean?

That it dates the song to a very late 80s, beginning of 1990s period? Jeeze.

[Setlist Scotty]

No need to call that opinion ridiculous. It's controversial, perhaps, but not ridiculous. LTL does sound dated, particularly because of 'the 90s bring new questions' lyric.

Take the Time freaking rules.

What does that even mean?

That it dates the song to a very late 80s, beginning of 1990s period? Jeeze.

So one simple line dates the whole song? Even after they've made sure to change it for all live performances?   

[The Walrus]

I'm saying it just dates it to 30 years ago. And I was referring to the studio version. I don't exactly keep up with every live detail of the band but that doesn't matter anyway, thank you very much, when talking about the version on the album. Not sure why people are getting on my ass about this, I was just saying the guy's opinion wasn't ridiculous.

[Setlist Scotty]

I'm saying it just dates it to 30 years ago.

C'mon. The whole album is over 25 years old, so by that reasoning, every song on it is dated. Yet he specifically pinpointed that one song. So the fact that it's as old as it is can't be the reason in and of itself.

If that single line in the lyrics is all that bugs him, then that is a bit much to label the whole song as dated.

And I was referring to the studio version.

And I was simply pointing out a detail you clearly weren't aware of thankyouverymuch.   

[The Walrus]

The lyrical content just makes me think of that period. The rest of the album doesn't. I dunno. I love it anyway

[erwinrafael]

I'm saying it just dates it to 30 years ago.

C'mon. The whole album is over 25 years old, so by that reasoning, every song on it is dated. Yet he specifically pinpointed that one song. So the fact that it's as old as it is can't be the reason in and of itself.

If that single line in the lyrics is all that bugs him, then that is a bit much to label the whole song as dated.

As I explained in a reply that got lost in between the back and forth, no, it is not the lyrics that make me feel the song is dated. It's the music itself. The vibe of the intro and the outro and so many parts really just scream late 1980s / early 1990s to me.