Your Controversial Opinions on DT

[Cool Chris]

Maybe for the die hard fan or musical student's discernible ear, but for everyone else. I think a vocalist's voice is going to be much more readily identifiable than a guitarist's tone. I think to say "every guitar player is immediately identifiable" (paraphrase) is not accurate to most casual music fans.

[425]

A singer’s voice is distinct, a guitar sound is not.

       

Every great guitar player is directly identifiable by their sound (tone).  It's just as unique and distinct as a singer's voice.  You replace JL or JP and the band will certainly sound radically different.  Vocals and guitar are the most difficult roles to interchange.

I have a hard time not seeing this response as disingenuous, to be honest. I have a hard time imagining how someone could look at the uniqueness of the human voice and the distinctness of a particular guitar set-up and say "Yes, these are exactly the same thing."

Let me explain this again. When there is rhythm guitar under a solo, played by the same guitarist, that does not immediately stick out as impossible, because one could easily imagine an additional guitarist, using the same set-up, playing that rhythm part. This is not at all the same thing as hearing the same person sing two different things at the same time, which is outright impossible on its face, and blatantly so.

[Ben_Jamin]

A singer's voice is distinct, a guitar sound is not.

       

Every great guitar player is directly identifiable by their sound (tone).  It's just as unique and distinct as a singer's voice.  You replace JL or JP and the band will certainly sound radically different.  Vocals and guitar are the most difficult roles to interchange.

I have a hard time not seeing this response as disingenuous, to be honest. I have a hard time imagining how someone could look at the uniqueness of the human voice and the distinctness of a particular guitar set-up and say "Yes, these are exactly the same thing."

Let me explain this again. When there is rhythm guitar under a solo, played by the same guitarist, that does not immediately stick out as impossible, because one could easily imagine an additional guitarist, using the same set-up, playing that rhythm part. This is not at all the same thing as hearing the same person sing two different things at the same time, which is outright impossible on its face, and blatantly so.

Well, it's the same with Guitar. It's the same person and tone.

Also, Tone is a very big part of music. It's why guitarists can mimic a human voice.

[MirrorMask]

Maybe for the die hard fan or musical student's discernible ear, but for everyone else. I think a vocalist's voice is going to be much more readily identifiable than a guitarist's tone. I think to say "every guitar player is immediately identifiable" (paraphrase) is not accurate to most casual music fans.

This is true. I guess I can identify Brian May's guitar, but I'm not sure I could even recognize the guitarists of my favorite bands if they play something outside of their bands. I could probably identify Petrucci's slow and melodic soloing, but I guess that if you let me hear a random piece of music with a very Iron Maiden-ish vibe, I couldn't tell if it's a random musician influenced by the band, or actually Dave Murray (or one of the other two).

[The Walrus]

Maybe for the die hard fan or musical student's discernible ear, but for everyone else. I think a vocalist's voice is going to be much more readily identifiable than a guitarist's tone. I think to say "every guitar player is immediately identifiable" (paraphrase) is not accurate to most casual music fans.

+1

Even as someone who has a degree in music... this is totally true.

[Lethean]

I get both sides of the guitar thing - some people can pick out different players and others can't, or only can for some.

But, I don't see why this whole thing should matter.  It's true that one person can't, in real time, sing lead and backing vocals at the same time.  But so what?  A guitar player can't either, and even if you can't tell one player from another, you still know for a fact that Petrucci is the only one playing.  Yeah... they could have gotten someone else, but they didn't.  DT could have found someone like Journey did who sounds just like JLB.  But in both situations, you have the credits and interviews and such, so you know that they put down on record what they can't actually do in real time.  I don't see why that matters for either a singer or a guitar player and if it sounds great, which it usually does, I say go for it.

[pg1067]

A singer's voice is distinct, a guitar sound is not.

       

Every great guitar player is directly identifiable by their sound (tone).  It's just as unique and distinct as a singer's voice.  You replace JL or JP and the band will certainly sound radically different.  Vocals and guitar are the most difficult roles to interchange.

I have a hard time not seeing this response as disingenuous, to be honest. I have a hard time imagining how someone could look at the uniqueness of the human voice and the distinctness of a particular guitar set-up and say "Yes, these are exactly the same thing."

I wouldn't go so far as to say disingenuous, but I also disagree that "[e]very great guitar player is directly identifiable by [his/her] sound (tone)."  For starters, that statement assumes that every great guitar player has a single, distinctive "sound (tone)," which simply isn't true.  I also agree that it matters greatly who the listener is.  I'm a musician and reasonably knowledgeable music fan, but I can rarely tell the difference between, e.g., Adrian Smith and Dave Murray or Glenn Tipton and K.K. Downing.  Sometimes I can figure it out because of playing style, but I certainly cannot do it solely because of "sound (tone)."

[425]

The difference, for me, is between “this is possible to be live” and “this is not.” It is possible to create a second guitar set-up, identical to the first, and have someone play the rhythm part on that set-up. It is not possible for one person to sing two parts on the same time. That is why it takes me out of it somewhat when, say, you have “Digging up a goldmine (digging up a goldmine)” or “Shed your light on me (shed your light on me)” in a way that it doesn’t to simply have an extra rhythm part during a solo. If those backing parts were sung by JP, that would bring the album closer to a live sound and further away from an processed one, which, to me, sounds a lot better. I think even other things being equal the “shed your light on me” bit would sound better with a singer whose style is substantively different from James’s. And I say all this with TBP being in my top 10.

I’m not saying it has to sound better to everyone, but I am saying that there is gulf of difference between literally the same person’s voice and the tone of a guitar, which can be replicated simply by duplicating the set-up and playing in a similar style, so it therefore doesn’t stand the test of logic to jump down my throat with a half dozen emojis for wanting John to sing backup on the albums while not caring so much if he plays rhythm under a solo.

I will acknowledge that “disingenuous” may have been going a bit far. I was responding to what I perceived as an aggressive response with my own aggression, but I don’t think I really have enough information to know whether or not PetFish was being disingenuous, so I apologize for implying that.

[bosk1]

The difference, for me, is between "this is possible to be live" and "this is not." It is possible to create a second guitar set-up, identical to the first, and have someone play the rhythm part on that set-up. It is not possible for one person to sing two parts on the same time. That is why it takes me out of it somewhat when, say, you have "Digging up a goldmine (digging up a goldmine)" or "Shed your light on me (shed your light on me)" in a way that it doesn't to simply have an extra rhythm part during a solo.

I don't fully agree with you, but I get what you are saying.  But it's interesting that, for me, it was often the other way around.  With a lot of the '80s guitar rock I grew up listening to, it was very common to have gang vocals for the backups, and those would often very discernably include the lead singer.  That never bothered me for some reason.  But what would drive me nuts is when I would hear single guitar bands like Van Halen or Dokken where there was CLEARLY a second (or third) guitar part, knowing that it was only one guitarist.  But I eventually got over that, and it rarely bothers me anymore.  It still does at times with DT, where it is blatantly obvious, like Scotty's example of TCOT.  But for the most part, it often doesn't even register with me.

[geeeemo]

About the whole idea of extra lead singer vocals layered in a live performance as well as with guitars...  Yes, it's true that the shows aren't purely live, but I am 55 and I saw many great rock concerts as a young teenager. (Rush being the first ) The concerts are just better now.  Technology and it's adding a little bit of "fakeness" to a live show, is Waaay better than how they used to sound.
I think it is kinda fun to watch the musicians and try to decipher what they are actually doing 

[bosk1]

About the whole idea of extra lead singer vocals layered in a live performance as well as with guitars...  Yes, it's true that the shows aren't purely live, but I am 55 and I saw many great rock concerts as a young teenager. (Rush being the first ) The concerts are just better now.  Technology and it's adding a little bit of "fakeness" to a live show, is Waaay better than how they used to sound.
I think it is kinda fun to watch the musicians and try to decipher what they are actually doing 

Totally.  Kind of a hybrid situation that is fun to watch is when the musicians ARE actually playing everything, but using technology to replicate parts at the same time, like playing a main riff through once, having a looper then repeat it, playing another riff, and having the looper add that, and then playing leads over the loops.  The Travis Larson Band does that a lot, for example.  If you don't know what I am talking about, here is a song that is ONLY Jennifer Young on bass alone for the entire song, but she lays down a couple of different parts in the beginning that get looped, and then adds in other stuff:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlZvX5b9HHI

[PetFish]

I'm not being "disingenuous", yes, I had to look it up to make sure I knew what this means, because it's true.  After vocals, the next most-unique instrument is the guitar, and it's not very far back at all, it's pretty much riding the bumper of the vocals.

I also said "great" guitar players (ie. JP, Vai, Gilbert, Satch, Bettencourt, etc) and not Jonny Powerchord since the great players strive for the ultimate tone and in doing so establish what "they" sound like over any other players out there.

I'm sure it's obvious for guitar players out there, just like drummers can identify drummers by their sound/style, but I can't since I'm not a drummer and don't know the nuances like I do with guitar.  It's also why on TV (ie. The Voice) nobody cares about the band at all (which is a travesty), only the vocals, since everyone has a voice and can relate, but not everyone plays an instrument... which is why, for many new listeners to DT, they can usually decide right away if they want to hear more based solely on LaBrie's vocals, and why so many people say "I'm sure it's great, but I can't get past the vocals."

Anyway, off-track a little, but in the end being nitpicky over some pre-recorded background vocals or how the same singer shouldn't sing multiple parts in-studio, seems silly to me.

[Herrick]

A singer's voice is distinct, a guitar sound is not.

       

Every great guitar player is directly identifiable by their sound (tone).  It's just as unique and distinct as a singer's voice.  You replace JL or JP and the band will certainly sound radically different.  Vocals and guitar are the most difficult roles to interchange.

I have a hard time not seeing this response as disingenuous, to be honest. I have a hard time imagining how someone could look at the uniqueness of the human voice and the distinctness of a particular guitar set-up and say "Yes, these are exactly the same thing."

I wouldn't go so far as to say disingenuous, but I also disagree that "[e]very great guitar player is directly identifiable by [his/her] sound (tone)."  For starters, that statement assumes that every great guitar player has a single, distinctive "sound (tone)," which simply isn't true.  I also agree that it matters greatly who the listener is.  I'm a musician and reasonably knowledgeable music fan, but I can rarely tell the difference between, e.g., Adrian Smith and Dave Murray or Glenn Tipton and K.K. Downing.  Sometimes I can figure it out because of playing style, but I certainly cannot do it solely because of "sound (tone)."

Playing style also affects tone methinks. So if you can tell between Downing & Tipton by their style then I'd say that counts as being able to identify them by their tone.

[KevShmev]

I think a better way to say it is, "A singer's voice is more distinct that a guitar player's sound, generally speaking," because most guitarists definitely have a distinct sound. 

[425]

And: Major elements of a guitar player's sound can be closely approximated by another guitar player when it comes to rhythm parts under a solo, while a singer's voice generally cannot be closely approximated by another singer.

And look, I'm not trying to tell anyone else what to care about or not. I'm saying, to me, it sounds markedly worse to have the lead singer doing his own backup vocals. This is the controversial opinion thread, and that is my controversial opinion.

[IDontNotDoThings]

I'd also like to add that guitar tones are less distinct because they're easier to imitate. If you know all of your favourite guitarist's EQ settings, pedals, guitar model, amplifier brand, etc., it's not that hard to replicate a guitar sound to a near-perfect degree. Whereas no matter how much you know about your favourite singer, it's going to be a hell of a lot harder to imitate them to that extent because the shape of vocal cords is largely determined by involuntary genetics.

[SjundeInseglet]

I'd also like to add that guitar tones are less distinct because they're easier to imitate. If you know all of your favourite guitarist's EQ settings, pedals, guitar model, amplifier brand, etc., it's not that hard to replicate a guitar sound to a near-perfect degree. Whereas no matter how much you know about your favourite singer, it's going to be a hell of a lot harder to imitate them to that extent because the shape of vocal cords is largely determined by involuntary genetics.

That may very well be true but you'll never be able to duplicate all the nuances in their playing that give them an unique "voice" such as the phrasing, the way they bend notes, the vibrato,...

[IDontNotDoThings]

I'd also like to add that guitar tones are less distinct because they're easier to imitate. If you know all of your favourite guitarist's EQ settings, pedals, guitar model, amplifier brand, etc., it's not that hard to replicate a guitar sound to a near-perfect degree. Whereas no matter how much you know about your favourite singer, it's going to be a hell of a lot harder to imitate them to that extent because the shape of vocal cords is largely determined by involuntary genetics.

That may very well be true but you'll never be able to duplicate all the nuances in their playing that give them an unique "voice" such as the phrasing, the way they bend notes, the vibrato,...

Sure you'll never get it perfectly, but it'd still be significantly easier than accurately replicating someone else's singing voice.

[Evai]

I'd also like to add that guitar tones are less distinct because they're easier to imitate. If you know all of your favourite guitarist's EQ settings, pedals, guitar model, amplifier brand, etc., it's not that hard to replicate a guitar sound to a near-perfect degree. Whereas no matter how much you know about your favourite singer, it's going to be a hell of a lot harder to imitate them to that extent because the shape of vocal cords is largely determined by involuntary genetics.

Pfft, no-one has ever got close to replicating Eruption the way it sounds on record. But Ralph Saenz can do a flawless DLR impression

[Volante99]

I'd also like to add that guitar tones are less distinct because they're easier to imitate. If you know all of your favourite guitarist's EQ settings, pedals, guitar model, amplifier brand, etc., it's not that hard to replicate a guitar sound to a near-perfect degree. Whereas no matter how much you know about your favourite singer, it's going to be a hell of a lot harder to imitate them to that extent because the shape of vocal cords is largely determined by involuntary genetics.

Pfft, no-one has ever got close to replicating Eruption the way it sounds on record. But Ralph Saenz can do a flawless DLR impression

To be fair, not even Eddie Van Halen has come close to replicating Eruption the way it sounds on the record.

I find this whole debate a bit silly. Obviously human voices are more distinct than guitar tones, and this is coming from a guitar player who can usually identify a guitarist within a few notes.

[Evai]

-Beneath The Surface

-Very natural sounding song, acoustic guitars, orchestral instruments

-Heartfelt lyrics

-Toybox Keytar solo bloopidy bloop well that just happened

[DoctorAction]

-Beneath The Surface

-Very natural sounding song, acoustic guitars, orchestral instruments

-Heartfelt lyrics

-Toybox Keytar solo bloopidy bloop well that just happened

I really love that solo and the song in general. But nicely put. 

[Dublagent66]

JR's solo in BTS is what turns me off about the song (what a goofy sounding patch) besides the fact that it's just a flatout sad song.  The only thing memorable about it is JP's acoustic work.

[Cool Chris]

That is an awesome solo you guys! That could be my favorite Jordan Rudess moment.

[pg1067]

That is an awesome solo you guys!

Agree, and I dig the patch.

[Evai]

I don't actually have any problems with it, just a funny observation while I was listening the other day    A Rite Of Passage, on the other hand... bloopidy WHAT

[Cool Chris]

A Rite Of Passage, on the other hand... bloopidy WHAT

No kidding. If BtS is my favorite Jordan moment, ARoP is probably my least favorite.

[Dublagent66]

The Solitary Shell patch would've worked much better in the BTS solo.  There are some similarities, but the distinct differences are overwhelmingly in SS' favor.

[The Walrus]

That is an awesome solo you guys! That could be my favorite Jordan Rudess moment.

Not my favorite Rudess moment but that is indeed an awesome solo. Love the patch he uses and the solo itself is great.

Also agree that the AROP synth solo is... oof.

[IDontNotDoThings]

Controversial opinion: the AROP keyboard solo isn't that bad. By comparison, the first keyboard solo in Home is far worse, though it certainly doesn't ruin the song for me.

[nikatapi]

Here's a controversial opinion:

Ever since JP took the wheel in DT, they've become a much more "sterile" band. No surprises, almost static setlists, and while they still do extraordinary performances, it's just professional but without the uniqueness that existed before and made the band so special.

While i appreciate DT's effort for more impressive shows, with lights and projections, i still see them us unnecessary, especially when used as a reason for the band not rotating setlists anymore.

It became apparent to me during their last visit to Greece, where they hadn't played since 2011. One would hope and expect a bigger set (even though it was a forced "festival" date), or at least 1-2 more songs being thrown in just for satisfying people who have waited for so long (or are new fans).
But, the setlist was completely unchanged from the rest of the tour.

I can see the band's point of view, but still feel like it's become much more of a job, or necessary evil if i might say for them to tour, instead of using it as an opportunity to interact with the different audiences and grow even bigger.

[Grizz]

That's controversial? If so, it shouldn't be.

[Evai]

Yeah we've heard that a million times

I don't like when artists reveal how their lyrics came about. Ministry Of Lost Souls was really interesting to me, until JP revealed it's a story he made up about a girl drowning. It's a sad song so I'd like to imagine there's some deeper meaning/real life thing behind it, like other similar songs. I guess that's my fault for watching 'making of' videos though.

[MirrorMask]

Just imagine it the way you like it, songs aren't the sole and exclusive emotional propriety of the songwriter.

Back in the day when I was active on James' board, I found out that a solo song of his, Stranger, that moved me deeply, and that I thought was about the deep and profound attraction towards another person regardless of what other people might think (people that might not get the actual brilliancy of said person) was actually "just" a song about addiction, so I posted that I was a bit let down by this simpler meaning.

James, through the webmaster, actually replied to me, saying that if I connected to that song so deeply, I could as well continue to imagine it the way I wanted it to be. Just do the same for Ministry.

Say that you meet Petrucci at a meet n' greet and you tell him "I really like this song, for me it has a deep meaning", I hardly doubt he would ever say to you "Lol what forget about that, it's about a girl drowning, end of the story".

[TAC]

Say that you meet Petrucci at a meet n' greet and you tell him "I really like this song, for me it has a deep meaning", I hardly doubt he would ever say to you "Lol what forget about that, it's about a girl drowning, end of the story".

I think he would actually appreciate that.