It's curious to see the correlation between comments that claim "there's so much to digest" with comments that claim "I don't like it."
Chew your food first, digest, then talk sh*t.
Sorry to be blunt, but as a lurker it seems there are far too many knee-jerk reactions. My first listen to TA was a combination of being both under and overwhelmed. As constantly stated there is so much to process, and I found what I did process did not grab me. 3 or 4 more full listens did the trick, I began keying in on the intricacies, began anticipating the next movement, began salvating at what comes next. Now I'm in love. Now I can fully appreciate what DT has done here.
DT, for me, has always been an acquired taste. I always need time to appreciate their latest release. This is what makes DT so progressive. They always put something new on the menu for me to try. At first I might miss my usual dish, but once it all sinks in, I can't get enough.
I feel a lot of the criticism on this album comes from disagreeing with the direction DT went in. A lot seems to come from misunderstanding what DT has done. Look, if you don't like the sound, you don't like the sound. But criticisms of too many ballads, filler songs, not enough stand alone content; all miss the point. You can't view TA through the SFAM lense. I feel facing this fact is what has dissapointed so many. This isn't a concept album. It's a rock opera. It's soup. If you start looking to pick out individual components you stop enjoying the thing for what it is.
Tldr: how can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?