Apologies in advance for all the text. (TLDR to Elite: We're talking past each other and I don't feel like you grapsed the point of what I was saying, so let's please just stop before this conversation gets even messier)
Agree, but let's not go too far overboard with claiming all those songs belong to different genres simpluy they incorporate elements from other styles. The general sound palette is similar throughout all their songs and some of the various substyles you've named are really not far removed from 'progressive metal' in general. Dream Theater are indeed also not unique in doing this and whether they're able to 'maintain a significant audience' is not really relevant.
Never claimed otherwise. I didn't say the songs
belonged to different genres, merely that they incorporated elements of different styles. If I did that, you can remind me of where I stated this and I'll retract it. I bring up whether they're able to maintain a significant audience because it kinda matters to the argument imo if we're even able to see
who the eclectic bands are. Someone could point to some band with less than 100 listeners on Spotify that have separate songs dedicated to reggae, hip hop, death metal, baroque, noise, ska, hard rock and folk, saying that it puts BtBaM and Mr Bungle to shame in terms of variety but if nobody really clicks with it and it all appears to be a novelty with all styles performed in a rough and rudimentary manner, then I don't think that really counts.
And this is where I really start to lose you, because to me it doesn't matter one bit. This looks like desperately searching for different genres in music where they simply aren't. Dream Theater are still a progressive metal band and they simply take some elements from other styles to use. The core sound is still progressive metal (which can get sort-of diverse anyway), even if they do employ ragtime ('... for like a few seconds'). I also don't see a need for distinction between 'melodic prog metal', 'bits of musical theatre' or 'bluesy hard rock', since all those examples come from the same album and are actually quite similar. There's no need to go overboard with genre-tags here.
I think this is all a matter of perspective. In the vast scheme of things, DT incorporate a lot more influences and flavours than most bands I've heard. I also did not argue against DT having always had progressive metal as the basis for their sound. Plus, I don't know... even if prog metal is still the anchor in the albums, it's fair to say that something like The Spirit Carries On isn't
really an example of progressive metal and has more in common with elements of a different sound as an individual song. Not to mention, even if it's for a few seconds, most bands don't really do diversions into wildly different styles in the middle of tracks like that. The fact that the ragtime bit is such a memorable moment to a lot of fans is a testament to that, I think. Maybe it's just me as well, but that Beyond This Life verse I pointed out doesn't seem to sound much like the material on One Last Time or Finally Free.
I'm not sure why this is something "desperate" to point out, which feels like a bit of an unnecessary attack (I don't think I did anything to insult you, after all). If there's an exaggeration of points here, it isn't coming from me. When you say this "they simply take some elements from other styles to use.", it feels like you're ignoring this:
Good luck even getting most prog bands (particularly those on the more metal end) to cover elements of over a dozen different styles over four albums.
Which feels like arguing against my point... by arguing my point but with a more dismissive tone.
But it doesn't 'switch between 10 styles' at all (and neither does Images & Words). And don;t get me started on 'subgenres'. The need to categorise everything is really pointless, especially in this context. If anything, Dream Theater stay really true to their own style indeed, which is progressive metal with hints and small steps to other kinds of music.
I mean... those points don't contradict? You can argue the significance (which wasn't really my point) of how prominent these other styles are compared to their main one, but even if it's on a fleeting level, if you're willing to take those styles as an accurate assumption, then it
still switches between them, just not to equal degrees. If I implied otherwise, then that's my mistake. Plus, you imply that subgenres (or the "need to categorise everything") are pointless... while assigning Dream Theater the
subgenre of progressive metal. By subgenres, I should've clarified that I mean stuff like metal, rock, jazz, blues etc. as primary genres and stuff like alt rock and prog metal as subgenres. darkshade made a point earlier that was one of the few I agreed with, that "Jazz has evolved beyond swing, bebop, post-bop, hard bop". Same applies to metal not just being a singular entity. If a band did an album which blended classic heavy metal, thrash, death, black, prog, symphonic and doom, I'd consider that a pretty varied affair. If you don't, then we simply draw distinctions at different levels. That doesn't mean I'm "desperately searching for different genres in music where they simply aren't".
I personally don't think Dream Theater, especially on their newer (read, everything since 8VM) albums, sounds 'eclectic' at all.
Kind of misses the point of what I'm saying. I was trying to get at how, while the progressive metal factor definitely sticks out because the songs themselves tilt that way, but that it's also generally more likely to have mid-song turns (not necessarily genre shifts, though often could be classed as such imo) in the vein of At Wit's End, Surrender to Reason, Illumination Theory or Fall Into the Light. In essense, I mean that while you're less likely to get something like I Walk Beside You or Misunderstood, there's also in increased likelihood of the As I Am / Panic Attack / Constant Motion of the album being a bit less of a pure expression of that style too imo. I'm not in the mood to argue this further, but I just wanted to set things straight on what I was actually getting at.
The definition of eclectic is "composed of elements drawn from various sources". In that context, I don't think what I pointed out has been unreasonable. I assure you that if there was a word for "draws from various sources, but with one being more prominent than the others", I would've wanted to use that instead.
I think Dream Theater's song were more diverse, or more playful, or blended more different styles, or had more unusual song-writing approaches on earlier records indeed.
So... I can't use this argument, but you can? The whole point of my style listing was to illustrate the kind of diversity that's still in the newer material in a way that was clearly recognisable, but that's all been brushed past and countered... with the same point but against those very albums. Hell, even if I didn't point that out with genres and instead simply pointed out the different vibe of the parts, I suspect that wouldn't have really changed the nature of the response, given that it was a "yes" to the question of homogeneity. Even aside from that, the playfulness is something we can agree to disagree on, because I still see a lot of fun and passion in the newer material and could pinpoint where I see this, same goes for unusual song-writing approaches (which I've recently discussed but could expand on further).
Many people blame Portnoy's departure for this, but looking back, I think this 'decline'* started with Train of Thought, their first album that actually went for a certain sound and went all the way to achieve that. Ever since, I feel like DT's music is more guitar-riff-based than a group-effort. Ever since, I feel like DT's music is more guitar-riff-based than a group-effort. Instead of interesting instrumental sections, the band opts for trade-off solos far more often. The result is more simple songs, less interplay between instruments (for example the instrumental sections in Metropolis, Beyond This Life, etc.), less interesting vocal lines and an overall 'dumbing-down'* of their music. I will say here that ADTOE and their vast song structures (see next quoted part) is indeed an exception!
* don't quote me on this for using these particular words, it's for lack of a better term.
I mean if A Dramatic Turn of Events was an exception, then The Astonishing should also be. Very few trade-off solos, differently structured songs, many instrumental sections that don't revolve around solos, a lot of interplay and layering, different sorts of vocal lines and a weaving of many leitmotifs for a pretty complex piece of work as a whole that I'd never describe as dumbed down. Even in DT12 and D/T, there are still quite a few instances of interesting (imo) counterpoint, neat vocal lines and cool compositional features that go on.
Just as a tip regarding those words, you could just say "I think they started losing me with Train of Thought" and "and an overall streamlining of their music" respectively instead.
I don't think we should argue this further though because at the end of the day, this is literally all a matter of opinion and even if we went into those details, I don't really see anything other than shrugged shoulders and a general sense of indifference coming from it.
Okay, so Dream Theater are pretty diverse.. depending on your frame of reference. I'm not saying I'm an expert and that you should listen to me, but a lot of metal bands (Dream Theater included) have a very narrow sound palette, so in the grand scheme of things, yes, Dream Theater have been doing the same thing (which is making good progressive metal albums).
Acts of any genre tend to play it safe, from what I've seen. I don't think this is necessarily exclusive to metal. Name people like Bjork, Between the Buried and Me, Kate Bush, Native Construct and Janelle Monae who really go wild in their diversity of sound and I will absolutely admit that acts like such can often make DT look relatively one dimensional in comparison... but that's
really eclectic stuff that's a very rare breed. Most artists are not genre-benders and I'm not really claiming that DT are either (again, apologies if that was the implication), but they're not
just playing their genre to the letter, even now. Not so eclectic to the point of distorting the boundaries of their genre, but definitely to the point of proving that these people do listen to and incorporate
elements of different styles outside of their usual baseline. I'd wager that significantly more artists
are playing their genre to the letter (and not just within metal, but within jazz, pop, rock, hip-hop etc.) and if not that, then their own niche of music that they've carved out for themselves. In case this gets misinterpreted, I'm
not saying this makes DT better than all those bands or like they're being really clever with it, I just take the view that DT as members listen to stuff outside vanilla prog metal and that it reflects in their music often, even in the instances where it's more in the margins.
If you become used to a steady musical diet of some really varied bands then sure, an album like Distance Over Time might sound relatively monochromatic. I just personally disagree with that from the bands I've listened to (and I'm not unaware of bands that eclipse DT in this regard, as I've pointed out).
I think we can safely state though that compared to the average metal band, Dream Theater's sound palette is a bit wider, but that's likely also the case why a lot of us on this forums are/were drawn towards them in the first place.
This kinda proves the point that I've been making... if they're varied enough for that to be a draw to them, then how is it not fair to say that they have a certain brand of eclecticism? I acknowledge that the term is a relative one and it may not apply to everyone's understanding of the band (hence why I tried to dull the term a bit with "modern DT's brand of eclecticism" instead of outright calling it eclectic without any qualifying terms), but clearly it's not entirely inapplicable, no?
The only real outlier here, I think, is The Astonishing, which while stylistically not even THAT much different from earlier stuff, was different enough for lots of people to dislike it. That said, there's also a lot of people who love it. It's a polarising album, and I think that's the case because it's different. (On further thought, you might say the same about Train of Thought as well, actually).
I think this underestimates how polarising both DT12 and D/T have been as well and I'd say it makes sense given their very different approaches to their surrounding albums, whereas the upcoming release looks like it's going to have a bit more of a universal appeal. Again though, I don't really want to argue this any further.
tl;dr:[/i] I enjoy DT, but let's not pretend they play many different styles of music simply because they occasionally employ fragments of other genres in their music. I try to explain as a response to Enigmachine's post why I feel DT's sound has become more predictable and less adventurous in more recent years.
Okay but... could you please do it (and I mean this sincerely) without doing things like calling my arguments desperate? Again, it feels uncalled for, considering that I didn't characterise your own opinion as anything of the sort. It's okay if you hold that opinion, but why not just say something to the degree of:
"Yes, they have elements of other styles, but they're generally a too brief and locked in with their primary sound for me to really call them proper diversions into that territory. Still, even though this applies to their earlier material too, I think it comes across feeling more diverse as those diversions are a lot more common and are more likely to be musically highlighted through the composition and production values." which I'd say is kind of fair enough. Instead, there's all these assumptions with what I meant with what I said when you could just ask.
I also think "but let's not pretend they play many different styles of music simply because they occasionally employ fragments of other genres in their music." is a reductive and contradicting statement. No, I don't think DT should be classed as a prog metal / hard rock / musical theatre / classical etc. band, but I also think it'd be equally inaccurate to say that they
only play one style of music and never stray from that path (note that I'm not saying you said this, because you even admit that they employ elements of other genres). That is, unless we're talking about generalities on a holistic album-to-album basis... which would feel like moving the goalposts a mile away.
Anyway, I only responded because I feel like my points were being misrepresented and I wanted to set things straight (and if it was something like the quote above, I likely wouldn't have), but I really don't want this chain to carry on further. Let's just amicably move on without stringing this conversation along this irrelevant tangent (and I recognise that I am to blame here in large part, due to these lengthy explanations of off topic issues).
Topic: DT15: A View From The Top Of The World (Timeline for DT15) (Read 349952 times)