Watched the Metropolis/SFAM review. Kind of disappointing, actually, for a few reasons:
First, it lacked a lot of the typical musical insight he usually brings. Yeah, he talked at times about keys and modes, and the chord progressions, etc. But there is a lot less of that. And a lot less bigger-picture analysis and why things are happening, how DT uses certain motifs in different ways, etc. I know it's hard to put a lot of that in when there is so much content to get through. But that is kind of his thing and what makes his channel unique. So he basically ignored what is his bread and butter.
Second, I'm kinda disappointed that he didn't at least use the time between tracks to comment a bit more on whatever song he just heard. Again, I know that's hard to do when there is so much material to cover, and the video is so long as it is. But given what I have come to expect from his past videos, he didn't really deliver on what he is known for.
Third, I could be mistaken, but I am pretty sure he has more familiarity with the material than this being a completely fresh first listen (other than TDOE). There were a lot of "tells" in his reactions and a lot of parts where he would sing along or guess where something was going that a fresh listener wouldn't be able to pick out. Yes, someone with a trained musical earn and lots of in-depth knowledge of theory is going to be able to recognize and predict where music is going to go a lot of times. One of my favorite reactors, Chase Carneson, does this a lot. For example, even on first listen, Chase can often pick up on the musical and structural cues to tell when a piece is going to go into a chorus or a new verse, and will often pause right at the transition. But this is because the song in question is structured somewhat traditionally or there are cues in the song that tell an educated listener that a transition is about to occur. There are a few times in this video where the cues on not obvious, but Doug apparently knows where we are going because he is right there with the transition. Or, for example, when the band or James repeats a melody, but changes it from what it was previously, and Doug anticipates and sings the change. He does it quite a few times, which makes it hard for me to buy that he nailed where the song was going based solely off of spontaneously applying his admittedly vast musical knowledge and vocabulary, while also simultaneously guessing which of the many available musical options the band or James would choose at a particular juncture. I don't mind at all if a reactor has previously seen/heard whatever he/she is reacting to. Just be up front about it and don't try to pass it off as a first time reaction if it isn't completely that.
Fourth, metal bands use double kick patterns. Get over it.
What I did like is that he did actually point out some things that are not obvious and are cool. It's just that he didn't do as much. I also liked that he followed the lyrics closely to try to get as much of the story as he could. And, frankly, the fact that he was so focused (and did a bit of research ahead of time) helped him pick up on a lot of things a first-time listener wouldn't have gotten. It was fun seeing him unpack the story in real time. And his enjoyment of the music and story were contagious, which renew my own appreciation of the album.
Overall, thumbs up. It was a fun watch, despite my disappointment in a few things.