DREAM THEATER ANNOUNCE THE RETURN OF DRUMMER MIKE PORTNOY

[Indiscipline]

I've given it a fair amount of thought over the years.  It's almost never on the level of "the band" and "music" though, to be honest. I had just moved to Erie, PA - without my family - which ultimately was a key component of my subsequent divorce.   It was very much a metaphor for me, and not in a good way.   

It's where I started to really take "Man plans, and God laughs" more seriously. 

I'm still not a determinist (though that may change) but I certainly started to give a lot more thought to the idea that things happen for a reason, or at least, there are multiple roads to get where we (think we) need to be.

To answer your question directly, we're a sum of all that has happened before, so "Yes, yes it was all necessary."  I don't think we get to here without going there first.

Man, that's scary. Six months before the split I divorced, among the causes being having to move to Spain for work.

[cramx3]

I think it was all necessary as well.  MP needed to do his own thing.  DT needed to continue for the sake of everyone elses income.

[CDrice]

I'll admit I'm a bit surprised to see a few people having feelings similar to mine on the matter. I guess that's a bit reassuring in a way. Granted I heard the news kind of late, and by that time there was already so much that had been said that I did not really try to catch up with what everyone said.

And relating to what DTFan0789 and MoraWintersoul, I'm not losing sleep over it and I'm still listening to the band, but it's been occupying my mind a lot. I think part of it might be due the suddenness and the ambiguity of it. Jimgolf mentionned that when Portnoy left there were signs showing things weren't going great in certain aspects at that point, which I'll admit I wasn't aware off as I was still relatively new to the band by that point. But from what I remember, the statement from Portnoy was clear about why he was leaving and that it was his decision to leave, even if he wasn't really happy about it.

But this time, it's kept somewhat ambiguous. Was Mangini let go? Did he decided he wanted to leave? Is it somewhere in between? Does it even really matter to know? I also find it strange that Mangini's own statement was accompanied by the new band photo with Portnoy. It would have make more sense to me to use a picture of him with the band (even if it's just an older promotional photo) or even one of just himself from a live performance from the band, maybe with his giant drum kit as it's been an iconic thing for him. But maybe that's just a detail and he might not have a choice in the matter.

I guess the mystery of the situation is what keeps the subject going in my mind. It's like a monster in a horror movie. As long as you don't see it, it keeps your mind active and engaged, trying to figure out what it could be. But once you see it in full it becomes less exciting. I imagine if we ever get more insights it's going to be when the band starts promoting a new tour or album, as I'm sure they'll be asked about it.

Nice to see you around, and I hope you stay. Your contributions to the "new album PC Paint" threads is a DTF legend!

Thanks Podaar! I forgot about those. I didn't realize that they would have left such a mark  I've been lurking around once in a while, but haven't posted anything in a long time as I just feel like I didn't have much to contribute honestly. And now here I am posting what are probably my two longest posts ever 

[TAC]

But this time, it's kept somewhat ambiguous.

There's nothing ambiguous about it.

[jammindude]

But this time, it's kept somewhat ambiguous.

There's nothing ambiguous about it.

The announcement was not ambiguous, but the reasons and motivations leading up to it are very ambiguous. And not just in the case of Mike Portnoy’s return, but in the case of the nature of Mike Mangini‘s departure.

[Trav86]

But this time, it's kept somewhat ambiguous.

There's nothing ambiguous about it.

The announcement was not ambiguous, but the reasons and motivations leading up to it are very ambiguous. And not just in the case of Mike Portnoy’s return, but in the case of the nature of Mike Mangini‘s departure.

The nature of Mike Mangini’s departure is Mike Portnoy’s return.

[NoFred]

But this time, it's kept somewhat ambiguous.

There's nothing ambiguous about it.

This is my reading as well. And that’s how it’s done, very professional in how sudden (no leaks/rumors) it was tbh. One day you don’t have the job anymore… sucks but I’m sure most of us have been there

[TAC]

But this time, it's kept somewhat ambiguous.

There's nothing ambiguous about it.

The announcement was not ambiguous, but the reasons and motivations leading up to it are very ambiguous. And not just in the case of Mike Portnoy’s return, but in the case of the nature of Mike Mangini‘s departure.

The nature of Mike Mangini’s departure is Mike Portnoy’s return.

Exactly this.

[bosk1]

Well, I'm glad some of you have the gift of prescience to know inside information that nobody else outside the band knows.  That must be cool.  Wish I had super powers.

[Trav86]

Well, I'm glad some of you have the gift of prescience to know inside information that nobody else outside the band knows.  That must be cool.  Wish I had super powers.

It’s pretty awesome.

[King Postwhore]

But this time, it's kept somewhat ambiguous.

There's nothing ambiguous about it.

The announcement was not ambiguous, but the reasons and motivations leading up to it are very ambiguous. And not just in the case of Mike Portnoy’s return, but in the case of the nature of Mike Mangini‘s departure.

Why is this important to fans?  How gives a flying you know what?  It is what it is.

[ReaPsTA]

I think MP's return has the power to pacify the universe of fans. There are people who are upset about the change, but they are such a minority that they won't make any noise.

And indeed there was a lot of respect for Mangini's tenure. Genuinely and also hypocritically. Some random guy on YouTube said something like "Now that MM is gone, everyone wants to say good things about him".
I have acquaintances in local DT fan groups who have spent all these years being very disrespectful towards MM and who thought it would be important to write some flattering things about the drummer now on social media. It sounds like they couldn't do this before. The problem was never MM but the absence of MP. In the end, it's always MP.

The schism era is over.

I think you're right and it's amazing the gravity that certain people just seem to have

[ReaPsTA]

Re MP's vocals, I get that some people might not like them. Personally, I'd rather hear him sing than JLB, but to each their own. However, he fits into the same category as Newstead and Michael Anthony. Their departures hurt the live show in ways far beyond their actual playing. DT has been a particularly boring live band since he left, and I put the bulk of it on them having to pipe in the backing vocals. Everybody's heard me say it a thousand times, but going to a click just killed them as a live band. That's the thing that most needs to change now that he's back in. If they persist in playing identical shows night after night his return won't really mean much to me.

Also, thus far the best part of this has been seeing old posters come out of the woodwork.

The Jason Newstead comparison hits hard.

[ReaPsTA]

Now that you've missed it all, you should go back and listen to it.  A large portion of it is fantastic.

I'd like specific recommendations for individual songs for someone like me whose favorite DT era is largely their least popular: SDoIT, ToT, Octavarium, and SC. (Other albums rank as "best" in other categories from a logical standpoint for sure, but for me, in the category of the overall feels they bring back etc, these are it.)

You know it's big news when a wild JustJen post appears.

Given the era you like, would try out:

At Wit's End
The Alien
Awaken the Master

[ReaPsTA]

My perspective is different than some of the old hats here, because I got into DT between ToT and Octavarium, so for me Mangini's been the drummer longer than Portnoy. The level of attachment isn't the same. Does this make both the next album and next tour way more interesting? Absolutely. But I didn't love BCSL when it came out and thought the band's songwriting in general had developed a lot of problems 2000s. Whatever ineffable magic the Mangini era didn't have, a lot of things I didn't like about the later Portnoy era were fixed. If the next album comes out and we go back to instrumental sections that have nothing to do with the rest of the song, overly-overt references to their influences, and drum fills every two measures, then, well, I'll be glad the broader fanbase is happy but it won't be my thing.

And yet...

A couple people have brought this up, but, while I liked Dream Theater live in the Mangini more than a lot of other posters, when DreamSonic was rolling through I wasn't motivated to see it.

And, in general, thinking about the next album, my thinking was "I hope it will be good, I think it will be good, but I also don't know what this lineup has to say that it already hasn't." With the power of retrospection, AVFTTOTW feels like a summation of the Mangini era. Some shorter songs, some longer songs, mostly good songwriting. Very solid approach.

There is a certain essence to things that makes them what they are that cannot totally be described through words (that which can be described in words is not the true Tao, and so on). While I would say the later Portnoy albums had lost that essence, Mangini-era DT never established an identity that was as strong.

Dream Theater is old. If, after 13 years, the issues that caused the split have been fixed, and what you are is not you, then what other choice to you have but to reconcile with yourself and become whole again.

Hopefully that's reflected in the music.

[Wim Kruithof]

I'm very often surprised by the vunerability that's in here shown, by many members. It really gives an insight in that this community is one where we're safe and respected in, in which many visions are equally alike, at least on a value level.

Like Stadlers... I am a christian and definitely believe in that all happens for a reason. In Portnoy's case, I think his departure is part of his soul / character growing, from a man who's always judging (himself, LaBrie, fans and all) to a man with so much more peace in life. Morse surely helped him on a path where judging isn't his primarly fuel, but love and ease.

If Portnoy's drumming evolved on that I can't tell, but he is a much better person than he used to be, that I'm sure of. The ego have left the building. At least, so it looks. Therefore I am curious to see how he and LaBrie will work out. And I do understand the impact back in the days. Since his return I have trouble sleeping, constantly find myself staring at my vinyls. Pumped up in every vain...

Sidenote, sorry if my English lacks, it still isn't my go-to, to say the least.

[Schurftkut]

definitely* ;-)

[Wim Kruithof]

definitely* ;-)

😂

[TheOutlawXanadu]

My perspective is different than some of the old hats here, because I got into DT between ToT and Octavarium, so for me Mangini's been the drummer longer than Portnoy. The level of attachment isn't the same. Does this make both the next album and next tour way more interesting? Absolutely. But I didn't love BCSL when it came out and thought the band's songwriting in general had developed a lot of problems 2000s. Whatever ineffable magic the Mangini era didn't have, a lot of things I didn't like about the later Portnoy era were fixed. If the next album comes out and we go back to instrumental sections that have nothing to do with the rest of the song, overly-overt references to their influences, and drum fills every two measures, then, well, I'll be glad the broader fanbase is happy but it won't be my thing.

This is something that I think the band finally nailed with AVFTTOTW. There's a lot of flair and showmanship, but never to the point of pointlessness, while not being quite as reigned in as DT12 or DOT.

[Trav86]

Yeah DOT was like they were afraid to stretch things out a little. Which kind of takes away part of their identity. View stretches things out more, but didn’t really take any risks. There’s nothing where I thought “oh this new for them!” At the time when BCSL came out, I was sorta over the style they were in. But now all of these years later, I kinda miss them going off the rails a little.

[hunnus2000]

All I got to say is be thankful with the short time you have with them because it ain't going to last forever. See Neil Peart.......

[TAC]

  Like I said, see the Portnoy thread in the main DT section; there ARE people here that are CONVINCED beyond any doubt that Mangini was FIRED, unceremoniously, and that he cried over his leaving in Rodrigo's interview.   Three lawyers and a couple people close to the band have indicated that there is no evidence to that effect (and that even if Mike was asked to leave, that's not tantamount to a "firing", with all that that entails). It's like we can't help ourselves.

I went back and forth with this deciding how I wanted to approach this, as I was basically done stating my position on this, but I have a couple of questions...


1. By lawyers, do you mean you and Bosk, or do you mean the band's lawyers? Serious question.

2. And if it's you and Bosk, do you guys have an actual OPINION on what happened? "We don't really know" is not an opinion. I'm asking, what is your opinion?

3. You mention ..."and people close to the band." Who do you mean? People that work for the band? Billy Sheehan?

4. I absolutely believe that at the time of Rodrigo's interview, he knew. That's my opinion, but his disposition when Rodrigo asks about DT completely changed to me. I don't have a law career, but I do have a management career of dealing with people, and that's how I read it. I tried getting confirmation on when he was told. Twice. I couldn't get it confirmed.

[bosk1]

Well, I'm not Stadler (...or am I?  You'll never know, will you?  Okay, I'll fess up.  I'm not.  I could be.  But I'm neither as handsome nor elequent), but I think I can answer all of these.  And I think they are good questions.

1. By lawyers, do you mean you and Bosk, or do you mean the band's lawyers? Serious question.

I'm pretty sure he was referring to him, me, and Paul (or maybe Samsara, although I don't recall him saying anything).  I don't think Stadler knows what the band's lawyers have said, if anything.

2. And if it's you and Bosk, do you guys have an actual OPINION on what happened? "We don't really know" is not an opinion. I'm asking, what is your opinion?

Bottom line is, we don't know.  Only a small handful of people actually do, and I don't think any of them are active members of this forum.  It could have been any one of a million scenarios.  For all we know, Mangini has an opportunity lined up that is a "perfect fit" for him at this stage of his life, and he initiated conversations with the band and said that he was thinking very seriously about pursuing that opportunity, which could have then prompted the band to go down the path of, "We can either start the audition process all over again, or we can reach out to Mike Portnoy and see if he is interested in coming back, and honestly, it's probably best for everyone if we go with the latter," and then it all fell into place and the band decided to go that direction.  That's just one thing that popped into my mind as a possibility that would fit with all the public statements thus far.  But we don't know.  There isn't anywhere near enough info out there to form any opinion about what might have happened.  Maybe someday there will be.  But for right now, my answer has to be "I don't know" because that is the only honest answer I can give. 

But here is one additional piece of information I do have from a very reliable source (and I HATE saying I have a source without being able to say who it is, because I think it's really bad form to do that, which is why I usually just keep my mouth shut in these situations; but I'm making an exception in this case because I think it's for the greater good):  Mike Mangini was not "fired."  Whether the decision for him to leave was initiated by him, by the band, or was mutual, I don't know.  But I do know he wasn't fired.

3. You mention ..."and people close to the band." Who do you mean? People that work for the band? Billy Sheehan?

Pretty sure he is referring to me and/or Wey.  But I could be mistaken.  But that said, I (and I think I can speak for Wey on this too) definitely fall into that category of being some who is somewhat close to the band (not tooting my own horn, just saying that I know them better than the typical fan) AND who has said there is no evidence of any firing.

4. I absolutely believe that at the time of Rodrigo's interview, he knew. That's my opinion, but his disposition when Rodrigo asks about DT completely changed to me. I don't have a law career, but I do have a management career of dealing with people, and that's how I read it. I tried getting confirmation on when he was told. Twice. I couldn't get it confirmed.

Pure speculation on my part, but I think he almost surely knew.  The timing would suggest that it was at least in motion if not decided, and so would his responses.  I have a hard time reading exactly what was going on in his mind, but his demeanor did appear to change and it really looks like there is more that he wanted to say but could not.  What that is is hard to say.

[gzarruk]

Bottom line is, we don't know.  Only a small handful of people actually do, and I don't think any of them are active members of this forum.  It could have been any one of a million scenarios.  For all we know, Mangini has an opportunity lined up that is a "perfect fit" for him at this stage of his life, and he initiated conversations with the band and said that he was thinking very seriously about pursuing that opportunity, which could have then prompted the band to go down the path of, "We can either start the audition process all over again, or we can reach out to Mike Portnoy and see if he is interested in coming back, and honestly, it's probably best for everyone if we go with the latter," and then it all fell into place and the band decided to go that direction.  That's just one thing that popped into my mind as a possibility that would fit with all the public statements thus far.  But we don't know.  There isn't anywhere near enough info out there to form any opinion about what might have happened.  Maybe someday there will be.  But for right now, my answer has to be "I don't know" because that is the only honest answer I can give. 

But here is one additional piece of information I do have from a very reliable source (and I hate saying I have a source without being able to say how it is, because I think it's really bad form to do that, but I'm making an exception in this case):  Mike Mangini was not "fired."  Whether the decision for him to leave was initiated by him, by the band, or was mutual, I don't know.  But I do know he wasn't fired.

Without trying to immerse myself too much back into this kind of discussion, which got me warned, I'd like to add another question: what's the difference between being "fired" and "let go"?

And I mean it seriously. As a non native English speaker, there might be some nuances I'm missing here, but I always thought they meant the same thing, just that "let go" is a lot more polite than "fired".

[bosk1]

"Fired" means the employer unilaterally made the decision, AND it usually implies performance or conduct problems.

But people separate from employment for a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with being fired, including:  They retire; They voluntarily resign; They part ways by mutual agreement, for any number of reasons; They are let go for budgetary reasons; Their contract expires or is not renewed; There is a triggering event under a contract; The employee is no longer capable of doing the job (for medical or other reasons); The employer just changes its mind and moves on for any number of reasons not included in the above.

[Mosh]

Thanks for the information, Bosk. What I'm reading is that there was also the possibility that the band was transparent that they were considering reuniting with Portnoy but maybe would only do so with Mangini's blessing? In other words, if Mangini wanted to stay in the band they wouldn't go there. This is more speculation obviously but a possibility I haven't really seen entertained yet.

[bosk1]

Thanks for the information, Bosk. What I'm reading is that there was also the possibility that the band was transparent that they were considering reuniting with Portnoy but maybe would only do so with Mangini's blessing? In other words, if Mangini wanted to stay in the band they wouldn't go there. This is more speculation obviously but a possibility I haven't really seen entertained yet.

Yeah, that's also entirely possible.

[gzarruk]

"Fired" means the employer unilaterally made the decision, AND it usually implies performance or conduct problems.

But people separate from employment for a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with being fired, including:  They retire; They voluntarily resign; They part ways by mutual agreement, for any number of reasons; They are let go for budgetary reasons; Their contract expires or is not renewed; There is a triggering event under a contract; The employee is no longer capable of doing the job (for medical or other reasons); The employer just changes its mind and moves on for any number of reasons not included in the above.

I understand. In that case, I definitely didn't mean he was "fired" as my previous posts suggested, but rather he was "let go" in favor of MP's return (just my view/opinion on the subject, not meant to be taken as accurate information).

Thanks for the information, Bosk. What I'm reading is that there was also the possibility that the band was transparent that they were considering reuniting with Portnoy but maybe would only do so with Mangini's blessing? In other words, if Mangini wanted to stay in the band they wouldn't go there. This is more speculation obviously but a possibility I haven't really seen entertained yet.

I can see this happening too. And he might not have been actively asked to leave, but I guess it wouldn't be super comfortable to know the rest of the band want to get their former member back but you're the one who prevents that from happening.

What I really thing that happened was that James didn't want to be the only tattooed member anymore, so he specifically asked for MP to be back.

[bosk1]

What I really thing that happened was that James didn't want to be the only tattooed member anymore, so he specifically asked for MP to be back.

An opinion I frankly hadn't considered, but am perfectly willing to sign up for! 

[Herrick]

Yeah DOT was like they were afraid to stretch things out a little. Which kind of takes away part of their identity. View stretches things out more, but didn’t really take any risks. There’s nothing where I thought “oh this new for them!” At the time when BCSL came out, I was sorta over the style they were in. But now all of these years later, I kinda miss them going off the rails a little.

I think it was a conscious decision to differentiate the album from The Astonishing, and not that they were afraid to play longer songs.

"Fired" means the employer unilaterally made the decision, AND it usually implies performance or conduct problems.

I think people are using the word "fired" in the sense that Mangini might've left the band involuntarily and it's a potentially shitty situation for him. I don't think anyone believes Mangini's no longer in the band because he wasn't doing his job well. "Leg go" would be a better term I guess but I've always disliked that because it still implies that someone has a choice when they're "let go".

[ReaPsTA]

"Fired" means the employer unilaterally made the decision, AND it usually implies performance or conduct problems.

I feel like the rest of DT initiated the change, but yeah, the idea that they were dissatisfied with Mangini seems crazy to me.

[Stadler]

Bosk covered everything exactly correct, including all of TAC's questions, and the distinction between "fired" and "let go", except for one. 

Before that, though, in terms of "fired" and "let go", I've been both and I've done both: there is a huge difference between someone walking into a room and hearing "You are fired" and grown adults sitting down and by the end of the meeting, the (working) relationship between the two parties is materially different.

My OPINION?  I've held off, but since you ask I will tell you:  I think it was like many things in life, no clear cut "this happened on this date and time" event, but a confluence of events over time.  I think dissatisfaction was growing on all sides, I think that while solo albums are not verboten, I think think Mangini's solo album was a door opening in the sense that the band then knew if there was no Dream Theater, he wouldn't be out on the street.  I don't know about the Berkley thing, but that may play in as well.  I think that there were likely discussions AFTER the solo tour between FAMILIES (not just the men) and for many reasons, not just music, it was decided that the classic incarnation was going to do this one (or more) more times.  I think there was probably some involvement from Neal Morse, honestly; it was... different at Moresefest this year.  There wasn't the optimism about the future that I normally get from those guys; there was a sense of finality, not to the Fest, but to the band itself.  There was a certain amount of "we may never do this again" that didn't seem limited to the Fest itself.    I think there is more going on in the Neal camp; he was perhaps looking to move away from NMB a bit. 

So I think lawyers started talking.   I think there is no question, given the timing of things, that Mike M. knew during the Rodrigo interview, though I do not think that's him getting emotional in the video; I literally think he just burped.  I'm being serious; that was my impression when I saw it before the news, and I'm not changing now.   I don't think Mike Mangini actively LEFT, opening a spot for a drummer, but I think they had a band meeting and put it on the table and Mike M. said that he wouldn't fight any decision made by the band as to the direction they were wanting to go.  One or more of the members said, "perfect world, we want to give this a try" and that was that.  The lawyers continued drafting documents, and they part as friends with the understanding that it's called the music BUSINESS for a reason. 

I have no clue why the decision was aired the day it was; I think the idea that it was going to leak and they wanted to get in front of it makes most sense; I can't speak for anyone else, but it seems as if this was a complete surprise, if not to Billy Sheehan, then at least to the public at large.

[bosk1]

@Herrick:  Yeah, I hate to even say it that way ("let go") because it still assumes some things that may or may not be true.  For all we know, behind closed doors, maybe it was 100% Mangini's decision to leave the band, but the way the contract is structured, the decision had to come from the band on paper so that certain benefits and ownership rights played out a different way that was better for everyone involved than if he "resigned."  It's not all that uncommon for it to play out that way where the employee wants to leave and initiates the conversation, but the employer is the one that needs to officially initiate it in order for things to happen a certain way (and I've seen the opposite as well).  That would also be consistent with the language of "Dream Theater decided" while not really being at all consistent with the fact that he was "let go."  "Let go" is technically correct in that hypothetical situation, but it is misleading.  Again, we just don't know. 

[TAC]

Got it, Bosk, and you're right that "firing" means something that MM did that was detrimental, and that is surely not the case. It's a fine line, as gzarruk asks, between being let go and being fired. Perhaps it's slightly more than semantics, but at the end of the day, it is being out of a job. And I believe Mike very graciously stepped aside to accommodate this change the band wanted to make.





@ Stadler, I think you pretty much nailed it on all counts.

[bosk1]

Good questions and discussion all around.  And despite that we initially went down a bad path earlier in the thread by some assumptions being put out there, this is why I think this type of format (discussion forum vs. typical social media platform) is VASTLY superior because we can have reasoned conversation and flesh out ideas vs. people just logging onto a platform and typing misleading one-liners and leaving it at that.