That wasn't very positive. I don't think it will be an issue for me, but a bit of a buzzkill.
I wouldn't put too much weight on the second review. He says a few things that don't make a whole lot of sense, unless Google translate is messing with me.
He says the two singles were almost 'pure self-plagarism'. Invisible Monster is not my favorite song but I don't hear the alleged self-plagiarism. He may have a point on the Alien, but I think that term is a bit excessive. Anyway, the fact that these songs are allegedly copies of older material does not seem to bother him if you read his description of them (though this is a bad thing about the rest of the album apparently). Then later he says ADTOE was an example in which the band wanted to 'do something different or explore a secondary route'. How is ADTOE exploring a secondary route? lol.
Ha also references several songs as being innovative and magic and none of the songs mentioned are from my favorite era of the band. So definitely not putting much stock into that review.
I disagree with this review on almost EVERYTHING.
The opinions about DT are so wild and all over the place sometimes. To make things more confusing, the way people connect to music is pretty mysterious and difficult to put into words. A person may say he loves X about a song, but when X is presented in another song in a very similar way, it's described as a weakness. For example:
This reviewers says the new epic shows 'lack of originality and strength in composition' but in the same paragraph contrasts it with BAI, which he describes as 'beautiful'. Apparently the fact that BAI has been shown to be eerily similar to LTL is irrelevant to his fondness of THAT epic.
When he reviews Sleeping Giant, one of two songs he describes as trying to be 'fresh', he then paradoxically says it lacks the originality (so it tried to be fresh but it wasn't? Unless he was in on the writing sessions, how does he know this was an
attempt at being fresh? Is the author struggling internally to decide whether the song felt fresh or not?) of The Best of Times. I am not sure why The Best of Times is in his mind fresh/original. I like the song, but not sure what about it was new at the time. Sounds very much like DT to me!
He says Answering the Call is a fresh composition but in almost the very next sentence says that it's very LTE in style. Since LTE has been around for over 20 years and has 3 albums, and has a distinctive sound, how is does that fit with the description of ATC as fresh?
Lastly, in his review of Transcending Time he says MM should 'contribute to his own style and create a school, something he has not done in 5 albums...' - I am not even sure what this means. Perhaps something is getting lost in translation. Is he saying MM doesn't have his own style? That would be an absurd thing to say, with no basis in fact. He very clearly has his own style, and his own vocabulary, which, by the very nature of his technical style, is different from MP's. You may not like it, but it literally makes no sense to say he doesn't have his own style.
All a longwinded way of saying, take these reviews with a grain of salt! Most of the time people are just trying to say 'I didn't connect with this music' but end up saying things that sound contradictory or just flat out don't make any sense (i.e., MM should contribute to his own style' because presumably he doesn't have one that is distinct from MP's). Describing what you are hearing is difficult when it's more than 'this is a guitar' or 'this is the chorus' and we have no idea who this reviewer is or if he has any musical proclivity or is just a prog fan. Even if we assume we would experience the same tedium that this guy did, he all but says it's the band's worst album to-date. Well, for me personally, even if DT15 is just the same ol' DT we heard on DoT or DT12, I can confidently say that this fact alone would probably make it a top 10 DT album lol.
Anyway, it's fun to read the reviews but all will be clear soon