DREAM THEATER ANNOUNCE THE RETURN OF DRUMMER MIKE PORTNOY

[bosk1]

Look, I don't want to keep going back around with this kind of thing, but he DIDN'T SAY THAT.  He said he'd be fine with whatever the band wanted to do.   "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it.  That being said, there is so much music of ours to come back and play, that I personally, I look forward to revisiting all that stuff, but if they want to play the newer stuff as well, whatever they want is fine."  ALL that says is that he wants to play the music that he hasn't played in a while, not an unfair point.  You don't REjoin a band and not play ANY of the music you helped create for 25 years.  He was silent on ANY level of "interest" specifically on the newer stuff.  Just an implication that he MIGHT prefer playing the older material, which, again, is not an unfair point.

I hate to go at you so hard, but I don't know what part of the implication of what MP said was that hard to understand. If the only reason you're going to play certain songs is because you're being asked to play them, that pretty obviously means a lack of interest.

Where things can go crabbed (and I've certainly done this), is assuming that one comment is the only thing MP will think/feel about it for all of the rest of time. Maybe he'll do some homework, sit down with the Mangini-era material, and think "actually I want to take a crack at some of these." Who knows.

But what we've got to go on at the moment is what we've got, and I'm not seeing the ambiguity there.

I, likewise, don't see what is so hard to understand.  And yet it is you, not Stadler, that is making things up and reading things into his comments that were not said.  He clearly said he will play anything.  He then expressed his preference for the stuff he knows.  One does not somehow cancel out the other.   

[ReaPsTA]

Look, I don't want to keep going back around with this kind of thing, but he DIDN'T SAY THAT.  He said he'd be fine with whatever the band wanted to do.   "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it.  That being said, there is so much music of ours to come back and play, that I personally, I look forward to revisiting all that stuff, but if they want to play the newer stuff as well, whatever they want is fine."  ALL that says is that he wants to play the music that he hasn't played in a while, not an unfair point.  You don't REjoin a band and not play ANY of the music you helped create for 25 years.  He was silent on ANY level of "interest" specifically on the newer stuff.  Just an implication that he MIGHT prefer playing the older material, which, again, is not an unfair point.

I hate to go at you so hard, but I don't know what part of the implication of what MP said was that hard to understand. If the only reason you're going to play certain songs is because you're being asked to play them, that pretty obviously means a lack of interest.

Where things can go crabbed (and I've certainly done this), is assuming that one comment is the only thing MP will think/feel about it for all of the rest of time. Maybe he'll do some homework, sit down with the Mangini-era material, and think "actually I want to take a crack at some of these." Who knows.

But what we've got to go on at the moment is what we've got, and I'm not seeing the ambiguity there.

I, likewise, don't see what is so hard to understand.  And yet it is you, not Stadler, that is making things up and reading things into his comments that were not said.  He clearly said he will play anything.  He then expressed his preference for the stuff he knows.  One does not somehow cancel out the other.

What am I making up?

[RodrigoAltaf]

Wow, what a "great" discussion you guys are having...

[Kyo]

Where things can go crabbed (and I've certainly done this), is assuming that one comment is the only thing MP will think/feel about it for all of the rest of time. Maybe he'll do some homework, sit down with the Mangini-era material, and think "actually I want to take a crack at some of these." Who knows

Yeah, it would be nice to get a more positive comment on this topic some day. It should be about playing cool music together, regardless of whether he was in the room when it was written.

It just seems weird to be talking so warmly about your bandmates after the reunion if you're ultimately going to act like the stuff they wrote without you just doesn't cut it.

[ZirconBlue]

Look, I don't want to keep going back around with this kind of thing, but he DIDN'T SAY THAT.  He said he'd be fine with whatever the band wanted to do.   "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it.  That being said, there is so much music of ours to come back and play, that I personally, I look forward to revisiting all that stuff, but if they want to play the newer stuff as well, whatever they want is fine."  ALL that says is that he wants to play the music that he hasn't played in a while, not an unfair point.  You don't REjoin a band and not play ANY of the music you helped create for 25 years.  He was silent on ANY level of "interest" specifically on the newer stuff.  Just an implication that he MIGHT prefer playing the older material, which, again, is not an unfair point.

I hate to go at you so hard, but I don't know what part of the implication of what MP said was that hard to understand. If the only reason you're going to play certain songs is because you're being asked to play them, that pretty obviously means a lack of interest.

Where things can go crabbed (and I've certainly done this), is assuming that one comment is the only thing MP will think/feel about it for all of the rest of time. Maybe he'll do some homework, sit down with the Mangini-era material, and think "actually I want to take a crack at some of these." Who knows.

But what we've got to go on at the moment is what we've got, and I'm not seeing the ambiguity there.

I, likewise, don't see what is so hard to understand.  And yet it is you, not Stadler, that is making things up and reading things into his comments that were not said.  He clearly said he will play anything.  He then expressed his preference for the stuff he knows.  One does not somehow cancel out the other.

What am I making up?

Having more interest in one thing does not mean he has no interest in the alternative.

[ReaPsTA]

What am I making up?

Having more interest in one thing does not mean he has no interest in the alternative.

If my opinion is bad and dumb then it is bad and dumb. It will be neither the first nor the last time that has happened.

I want to know what I am making up.

[Indiscipline]

Words are wind and all that jazz , but  - even forcing myself to wear cynical and pessimistic glasses - I can't help but considering "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it" as pretty encouraging, especially coming from the same man who decided what was played live during his first stint.

[TAC]

Words are wind and all that jazz , but  - even forcing myself to wear cynical and pessimistic glasses - I can't help but considering "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it" as pretty encouraging, especially coming from the same man who decided what was played live during his first stint.

Well, I took as a "yeah, if I have to" kind of thing, and I know he did NOT say that but if the door is open, then that's all I'm looking for.



The problem, to me, is that this Q&A is all we have to go on to get any glimpse of what the hell is going on in DT world. I thought they'd give Mangini 30 days post announcement, and then BAM, JP does an interview, or MP goes on Eddie Trunk.
How come no one in the band, and I'm looking at JP, has not come out and addressed the fan base in any way. When do they start work on the new album? Any tour visions? Anything? To me, he's kind of letting MP's comments get ravaged over with assumptions on both sides. Am I the only one that is offput by this?

As The Lawyers (affectionately) pointed out, things need to get hammered out in a deliberate manner, yet MP's comments would have you believe that roles haven't even been discussed, or much of anything. There must be some kind of documented language in place before they would make such an announcement, no? MP gave ME the impression that there's a lot up in the air still, but surely the business agreement has to have been completed?

[cramx3]

It seems the announcement was maybe immature so the immediately follow up of news is not really surprising.  I think a lot of people just are reading too much into the few things we do have leading to the "great" discussion happening now.  I dont feel like the band has to say anything until they are ready to, which to no surprise to me, is not right now. Given the holidays and a slow time of the year for the music business, I'm not getting my hopes up on any news until 2024. Of course I would love if they did announce a surprise holiday pop up show in NYC in a couple weeks, but I'm not banking on it.

[HOF]

I will say, I have zero concern one way or the other what songs they do or don’t play now that MP is back in the band. I’m cautiously optimistic that they might rekindle some of the magic in the studio of what the band had in the early days. Beyond that, I don’t really care about all the stuff this thread has devolved into.

[Stadler]

Look, I don't want to keep going back around with this kind of thing, but he DIDN'T SAY THAT.  He said he'd be fine with whatever the band wanted to do.   "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it.  That being said, there is so much music of ours to come back and play, that I personally, I look forward to revisiting all that stuff, but if they want to play the newer stuff as well, whatever they want is fine."  ALL that says is that he wants to play the music that he hasn't played in a while, not an unfair point.  You don't REjoin a band and not play ANY of the music you helped create for 25 years.  He was silent on ANY level of "interest" specifically on the newer stuff.  Just an implication that he MIGHT prefer playing the older material, which, again, is not an unfair point.

I think it's easy to take a quote and run with it, but his feelings on the subject here are pretty clear.  Let's hope he makes good on the "whatever they want is fine". To me, this is a huge sticking point on where I land as a Dream Theater fan going forward. No need for me to get upset about something that hasn't happened yet, but let's just say that I am cautious and paying attention to where this goes.

And that's fair.  I'm with you on that.  I don't really want a ton of drama either; DT is not The Stones. Or Aerosmith.  But conversely we don't have to manufacture drama before it starts.  Let the man fail, for god's sake, before assuming he will. 

[Indiscipline]

Words are wind and all that jazz , but  - even forcing myself to wear cynical and pessimistic glasses - I can't help but considering "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it" as pretty encouraging, especially coming from the same man who decided what was played live during his first stint.

Well, I took as a "yeah, if I have to" kind of thing, and I know he did NOT say that but if the door is open, then that's all I'm looking for.



The problem, to me, is that this Q&A is all we have to go on to get any glimpse of what the hell is going on in DT world. I thought they'd give Mangini 30 days post announcement, and then BAM, JP does an interview, or MP goes on Eddie Trunk.
How come no one in the band, and I'm looking at JP, has not come out and addressed the fan base in any way. When do they start work on the new album? Any tour visions? Anything? To me, he's kind of letting MP's comments get ravaged over with assumptions on both sides. Am I the only one that is offput by this?

As The Lawyers (affectionately) pointed out, things need to get hammered out in a deliberate manner, yet MP's comments would have you believe that roles haven't even been discussed, or much of anything. There must be some kind of documented language in place before they would make such an announcement, no? MP gave ME the impression that there's a lot up in the air still, but surely the business agreement has to have been completed?

About the "radio silence" I can only speculate, with curiosity more than concern, and I always end up telling myself the explanation is probably an extreme care to "do it right", avoiding every chance of creating controversy or backlash even with poorly-timed words, given - among other factors - Mike's heart-on-his-sleeve brand of communication and the fandom's acute sensibility.

 

[bosk1]

The problem, to me, is that this Q&A is all we have to go on to get any glimpse of what the hell is going on in DT world. I thought they'd give Mangini 30 days post announcement, and then BAM, JP does an interview, or MP goes on Eddie Trunk.
How come no one in the band, and I'm looking at JP, has not come out and addressed the fan base in any way. When do they start work on the new album? Any tour visions? Anything? To me, he's kind of letting MP's comments get ravaged over with assumptions on both sides. Am I the only one that is offput by this?

As The Lawyers (affectionately) pointed out, things need to get hammered out in a deliberate manner, yet MP's comments would have you believe that roles haven't even been discussed, or much of anything. There must be some kind of documented language in place before they would make such an announcement, no? MP gave ME the impression that there's a lot up in the air still, but surely the business agreement has to have been completed?

Along the lines of what Cram said, I don't think the band feels there is anything more to communicate at this point.  We know Mike Portnoy is back in the band as the drummer, and that they will be going into the studio at some point to begin work on a new album.  I don't see that there is any more news to announce.  The fact that some fans may want more information does not necessarily mean there is a need for more information. 

And I'll just say, with regard to the legal issues you mention and the stuff you are talking about with respect to specific roles within the band, those are probably two separate things.  There are legal things that need to be hammered out over time.  But as far as who will handle the set lists, whether there will be any rotations, and all of that kind of stuff, that isn't necessarily something that I would expect to be spelled out verbatim in any legal documents.  That is more something that they will feel out over time and will change organically.  I'm not all that surprised that there aren't clear answers to all of that at this stage.  I would be a bit surprised if there were.  That's just not really how I understand that this band operates.

[Mosh]

Words are wind and all that jazz , but  - even forcing myself to wear cynical and pessimistic glasses - I can't help but considering "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it" as pretty encouraging, especially coming from the same man who decided what was played live during his first stint.

Well, I took as a "yeah, if I have to" kind of thing, and I know he did NOT say that but if the door is open, then that's all I'm looking for.



The problem, to me, is that this Q&A is all we have to go on to get any glimpse of what the hell is going on in DT world. I thought they'd give Mangini 30 days post announcement, and then BAM, JP does an interview, or MP goes on Eddie Trunk.
How come no one in the band, and I'm looking at JP, has not come out and addressed the fan base in any way. When do they start work on the new album? Any tour visions? Anything? To me, he's kind of letting MP's comments get ravaged over with assumptions on both sides. Am I the only one that is offput by this?

As The Lawyers (affectionately) pointed out, things need to get hammered out in a deliberate manner, yet MP's comments would have you believe that roles haven't even been discussed, or much of anything. There must be some kind of documented language in place before they would make such an announcement, no? MP gave ME the impression that there's a lot up in the air still, but surely the business agreement has to have been completed?

I am increasingly questioning whether this is actually the case. When the announcement came, despite how sloppy the photo was and how sudden it felt, I assumed that at the very least this was something that had been in the works for awhile. I held the opinion, and I still do to some extent, that the reunion was set in motion during the LTE sessions. However the MP Q&A, the timing relative to holidays and Mangini's press tour have me questioning whether the business agreement actually was completed.

1: So far we know that the five members have not met in person yet (Portnoy says so in the Q&A and the recent social media post is the band sans James).

2: Portnoy does not know what his role will be and alludes to a "priority list" of things that he would like to see happen with regards to his role in the band - imo this is the biggest red flag as I assume these things would be discussed during a formal business meeting where paperwork is being signed.

I think the most likely outcome is that everything is formally set in stone. But I do see an outside possibility that the following events took place:

1: DreamSonic tour underperformed expectations. This combined with the reality that DT are likely entering the final phase of their career leads to a consideration for what that final phase should look like and what changes need to take place with this in mind. Some have also speculated that maybe somebody in the band has expressed a desire to retire soon, which could also be part of this.

2: Petrucci proposes bringing Portnoy back into the fold. He is now on good terms with everybody and it is reasonable to the fans to finish out the band's career with each founding member present. It is also a surefire way of juicing a fanbase that may have become somewhat disillusioned the last few years.

3: Portnoy is invited back into the band in late Summer/early Autumn. Ideally everything behind the scenes would be taken care of over the quiet holiday period and a formal announcement would happen in the new year, but because of Mangini's solo album press tour, it becomes necessary out of respect for Mangini to make the announcement so that he doesn't have to awkwardly dodge questions about what Dream Theater is up to next.

I said it many times before MP rejoined and I continue to believe that a reunion was inevitable. However, I think it is well worth considering whether the reunion would be happening at this point in time if the DreamSonic tour was a roaring success. Again, I think it is far more likely that the reunion was already in the works prior to DreamSonic, but some of these circumstances have me questioning if DreamSonic was the final piece to put it in motion.

Honestly I don't have a dog in this fight - I am happy that MP is back and while I feel bad for Mangini I also think ultimately he was given a great opportunity for the last 13 years and realistically he probably expected this day would come eventually. More than anything, I am mostly just fascinated by the circumstances of this reunion and hope that someday the curtain gets pulled back a bit more because I just find the band politics aspect interesting.

Ninja'd by Bosk:

The problem, to me, is that this Q&A is all we have to go on to get any glimpse of what the hell is going on in DT world. I thought they'd give Mangini 30 days post announcement, and then BAM, JP does an interview, or MP goes on Eddie Trunk.
How come no one in the band, and I'm looking at JP, has not come out and addressed the fan base in any way. When do they start work on the new album? Any tour visions? Anything? To me, he's kind of letting MP's comments get ravaged over with assumptions on both sides. Am I the only one that is offput by this?

As The Lawyers (affectionately) pointed out, things need to get hammered out in a deliberate manner, yet MP's comments would have you believe that roles haven't even been discussed, or much of anything. There must be some kind of documented language in place before they would make such an announcement, no? MP gave ME the impression that there's a lot up in the air still, but surely the business agreement has to have been completed?

Along the lines of what Cram said, I don't think the band feels there is anything more to communicate at this point.  We know Mike Portnoy is back in the band as the drummer, and that they will be going into the studio at some point to begin work on a new album.  I don't see that there is any more news to announce.  The fact that some fans may want more information does not necessarily mean there is a need for more information. 

And I'll just say, with regard to the legal issues you mention and the stuff you are talking about with respect to specific roles within the band, those are probably two separate things.  There are legal things that need to be hammered out over time.  But as far as who will handle the set lists, whether there will be any rotations, and all of that kind of stuff, that isn't necessarily something that I would expect to be spelled out verbatim in any legal documents.  That is more something that they will feel out over time and will change organically.  I'm not all that surprised that there aren't clear answers to all of that at this stage.  I would be a bit surprised if there were.  That's just not really how I understand that this band operates.

1: I agree with all of this. I guess the fact that there is nothing to announce makes me wonder why they rushed the reunion announcement when they could have waited to announce a reunion along with some tour dates, or an announcement that the reunited band is in the studio.

2: I definitely don't think that things like setlist stuff would be spelled out in legal documents, but I also think that if a formal meeting had occurred to negotiate the business side of things, elements of the band dynamic would have been discussed as well. But that's just me. 

[TAC]

And I'll just say, with regard to the legal issues you mention and the stuff you are talking about with respect to specific roles within the band, those are probably two separate things.  There are legal things that need to be hammered out over time.  But as far as who will handle the set lists, whether there will be any rotations, and all of that kind of stuff, that isn't necessarily something that I would expect to be spelled out verbatim in any legal documents.

I know Bosk, and I couldn't figure out properly state it, like just because who does what shouldn't mean that the business side of it isn't squared away. That's bad on me for not making that more clear.

[Setlist Scotty]

Wow - we should just stay home and listen to bootlegs from 1993? 

Setting aside the (unintentional???) dig at 'people like me,' 

It looks as if I need to clear the air a bit here (and sorry so late in doing so, real life and all that). It appears that some have taken offense at something I said. Apologies as I could have worded it better.

Apology accepted. 

And I agree with you that I don't want the band to become a nostalgia act. Metropolis part 3 is the last thing I'd want, but I would hope that a sizable portion of the MM-era albums will continue to be included in the setlists from here on out. It's just that going from a playing a concert (MP-era) to putting on more of a Broadway style performance (MM-era) doesn't sit well with me, which is why I hope we'll see a return to how DT did live shows in the past.
 
 

I didn't mind the nods to Awake and SFAM on the DT12 tour either. But I am not a "Let's play a really old album in full tour" kind of guy. It's one thing if it's its own tour like the I&W&B tour, which I skipped, but I did not agree with overshadowing the DoT album tour proper with Scenes in full.

I don't mind a band celebrating an album anniversary, especially if done separately from a tour supporting a new album, or a second leg, but to do it repeatedly gets old. And it was starting to get old with DT. 2014 had half of Awake and 1/3 of SFaM, which I agree was fine. Then they did all of The Astonishing in 2016, which I was fine with and understood even if it's my least favorite album. But then they started to milk it with the IWaB tour and definitely crossed the line IMO when they did all of SFaM in 2019-20 even though they had just "celebrated" an anniversary for it 5 years earlier. I'm glad JP had the sense to stop the anniversary bit with the last album-tour cycle. Had they done something for SDoIT (which is one of my favorite albums) they would have gone full on into Yes territory with being a pure nostalgia act. Thankfully that didn't happen.
 
 

They should really include James in the decision process for the setlists. Heck, every band should pay attention to their singer when constructing a setlist. I don't mean giving James veto power or creative control on the setlist, just clue him in in the decision and be open to minor stuff like "is it really a problem if we play this song fifth in the set rather than third? the more I'm warmed up in the show the more I can deliver better that specific vocal passage", stuff like that.

I posted this in another thread last night, and I agree with you about James being involved.

...in a discussion about aging singers and the Dreamsonic tour...

To me, it wasn't James' performance that was startling...I mean it was..but it was the band's perceived indifference to it. I have not been able to come up with a good reason for it. I know MP was up front about the band sitting James down after the 6 D's tour. Has anything like that happened recently? Oddly, MP did what he could to protect James, removing the second verse in TTT, and having instrumentals in the setlist. Conversely, JP hung James out to dry, on a night to night basis by not making adjustments that were clear from the jump, but also forcing another tour on James, who clearly wasn't up for it.

Great point Timmay. MP definitely paid attention to what JL was capable of and what he realistically wasn't. It's interesting because they did do the full version of TtT during the 2007 summer warm up tour, but only when they were playing IaW in full. Otherwise, MP made sure the abridged version of TtT was played, and IIRC was also careful about where he placed it in the set because of JL. Likewise, MP also had them do an abridged version of Voices since (I believe) the 2002 tour as JL was struggling with that one even back then. The irony of it was, either JP and/or JL wanted to do the full versions of those songs - I recall reading some comments in at least one interview saying as much - but MP insisted otherwise.
 
 

So I would be curious to hear from others who also attended shows on the PN08 tour specifically (*not* PN09 because that was the opening leg of the BCaSL tour and so automatically you would expect a higher turn out for that part of the tour). For those of you who attended one or more PN08 shows, what do you remember about the attendance? Was the turn out the same, larger or smaller than what you normally would expect?

PN08 was my 2nd and 3rd time seeing DT (the first time was the 1st leg of SC tour less than a year earlier).  Hard for me to compare the turnout of those two NYC PN08 shows to expectations or previous DT concerts.

What I can say, is those two shows were at Terminal 5 in NYC.  A 3k capacity GA venue. I don't recall it being sold out, and maybe not even full, but the floor wasn't empty by any means.  What my friend often tells me of his favorite memory was that after Opeth played, a significant amount of people left, leading us to go from the back of the floor to pretty close up.  This happened both nights, but more so on night 1. If I had to guess based on my shady memory, probably around 2k people showed up.  Which isn't that different than DT shows these days in the US.

For DreamSonic, they played the theater at MSG in NYC.  This is fully seated 5.6k capacity theater style venue.  Its pretty big. But they did curtain off the back section.  I'm not sure how many seats that leaves, but I'd guess around 3k and the show didn't sell great leading up to it, but I think many people like myself bought tickets at the door to save on costs as inside it didn't look quite as empty as it did on livenation leading up to the show.... but it still was fairly empty in the back.  Maybe another 2k showed up.

The CT Dreamsonic show would be shocked if more than 1k were there. Maybe even 500.

So I think the PN08 shows were typical attendance for DT and the DS shows were under performing.

Thanks for the insight! Interestingly, I saw them at the Theater at MSG but it was the final night of their North American Evening With tour in 2004, and IIRC, the place was packed. That was the show where MP asked one of the crew guys to pull someone from the very last row to get up on stage with MP to play the Siamese Monster together.
 
 

My theory is that mainly due to family obligations, DT started to transform from a band to a business after the problems they had during the FII era. The music got more formulaic and the changing music industry environment meant that they had to rely more on touring income than the album royalties but they could only be on the road for 4 weeks at a time because they are family men now. (Which is totally understandable.) At the same time, their fame within the musician circles led to additional income such as the ability to attach their names to gear, with the most successful one being the JP line of guitars. So much so that Petrucci now writes songs because there's a new piece of equipment coming out: Awaken the Master is promotional material for the 8-string JP guitar.

My experience in the music industry has taught me that if you achieve fame through your ability with any given instrument, there's an unwritten obligation to push the boundaries of what is possible with that instrument. The 2000's is when MP became the weakest instrumental member of Dream Theater, he stopped doing clinics and solos, and started referring to himself as a groove and feel drummer and given how he started his career, this could be considered a regression. I think/know some of his endorsement deals came very close to a termination within the last decade.

Very interesting insights Kocak - thanks for sharing. I can't say that I fully agree with DT becoming more of a business around the time JR joined - I think the business aspect probably started at least around the writing period of FII or maybe even earlier. Nonetheless, I'd imagine that over time as they continued the write-record-tour cycle repeatedly, some more of that business aspect crept in.

Regarding the potential for MP to have lost some of his endorsement deals, why do you think this was? Was it because MP was no longer in a big name band? I find this info surprising regardless because he has continued to be a big name among drummers despite not having been in DT for so long. Some of that might be because of the numerous other bands he was involved with, but I think also because he's a very sociable person in the music industry (far more so than the other guys) and knows how to market himself so that he stays visible.
 
As for all your comments about how he went about choosing which bands/projects he was going to involve himself with after leaving DT, I can't say I necessarily agree with your point that he was systematically picking out what style of music he was going to involve himself, although as I mentioned, he does know how to market himself, so that is always a possibility. Nonetheless, he has always struck me as being more of a person to go by his gut/instinct than plot everything out methodically as you seem to imply (apologies if you're not). In the case of AM, he wanted to work with Russell Allen, but it just so happened that RA had already started working with Mike Orlando in what became AM, so MP rode that train. For Flying Colors, Bill Evans was the one who put that band together although obviously MP was happy to get involved when the invitation was extended to him. So at least with these bands, it wasn't MP plotting the course.

Of course he was the impetus for PSMS, but even then, it wasn't like he was quick to start SoA immediately afterward. However, MP's willingness to put SoA together when he did could have been a response to the failure for all these other bands to succeed to DT's level, but I don't know if even that is true, as opposed to the fact that he was finally willing to return to doing something more akin to what he did in DT. But even though SoA was not a huge success initially, it's quite possible that it could have grown if given the proper time. Bumblefoot implied as much from the interview he gave when he first confirmed that SoA was done. So it's hard to say. Still, if given the choice to return to DT or to do something with SoA, I can't blame MP for wanting to return to DT after all this time.
 
 

I attended the May 2, 2008 PN08 show at the Gibson Amphitheatre in Los Angeles.  We didn't arrive in time for 3, and watched some of the other two openers' shows but mostly stayed in the bar area because their vocals were laughable.  DT had played the same 6,200 seat venue nearly a year earlier on the first leg of the SC tour.  The Gibson had a pit area, two levels of fixed floor seats, and a mezzanine.  For the PN08 show, I had bought front row seats on Stubhub but told my friends I bought them at face value, so I can't say I really noticed the attendance, but I think I'd have noticed if attendance was significantly lower than it had been the year before.  I think the far side sections of the second tier of floor seats were mostly empty, as were the back rows of the second tier, but otherwise, I think both shows were well-attended (5,000ish probably).

Paul thanks as well for sharing your experience. I can relate because I was at both those shows, too.    Sounds like we had a similar reaction to the opening acts!     But yeah, from what I recall, both shows seem to have similar attendance levels.
 
 

Portnoy said they lost money on that tour if I remember correctly or at the very least broke even. I too skipped some of the bands. Regardless, I think that shows attendance didn't meet their goal but obviously bringing that many bands out adds expenses. Whether that meant attendance was less or the same, I can't say. But it didn't make money.

Actually, you're getting the PN tours mixed up. It was the 2009 North American PN tour that broke even. But I remember MP also commenting that at that particular time (summer 2009), ticket sales in general were light, so that could have been a factor as well.

[Stadler]

Look, I don't want to keep going back around with this kind of thing, but he DIDN'T SAY THAT.  He said he'd be fine with whatever the band wanted to do.   "Whatever they want to do, I'm up for it.  That being said, there is so much music of ours to come back and play, that I personally, I look forward to revisiting all that stuff, but if they want to play the newer stuff as well, whatever they want is fine."  ALL that says is that he wants to play the music that he hasn't played in a while, not an unfair point.  You don't REjoin a band and not play ANY of the music you helped create for 25 years.  He was silent on ANY level of "interest" specifically on the newer stuff.  Just an implication that he MIGHT prefer playing the older material, which, again, is not an unfair point.

I hate to go at you so hard, but I don't know what part of the implication of what MP said was that hard to understand. If the only reason you're going to play certain songs is because you're being asked to play them, that pretty obviously means a lack of interest.

Where things can go crabbed (and I've certainly done this), is assuming that one comment is the only thing MP will think/feel about it for all of the rest of time. Maybe he'll do some homework, sit down with the Mangini-era material, and think "actually I want to take a crack at some of these." Who knows.

But what we've got to go on at the moment is what we've got, and I'm not seeing the ambiguity there.

Come at me, bro!!!!!      Kidding.

The problem is the "implication" to begin with.  I think it's unsound based on what was actually said.  I'm not saying it's not TRUE - it's certainly possible - I'm just saying it's kind of unfair at worst and biased at best to take that implication from what we have of what was said.

[ReaPsTA]

[snipped - Hypothetical reunion timeline]

IMO this makes sense.

I don't mind a band celebrating an album anniversary, especially if done separately from a tour supporting a new album, or a second leg, but to do it repeatedly gets old. And it was starting to get old with DT. 2014 had half of Awake and 1/3 of SFaM, which I agree was fine. Then they did all of The Astonishing in 2016, which I was fine with and understood even if it's my least favorite album. But then they started to milk it with the IWaB tour and definitely crossed the line IMO when they did all of SFaM in 2019-20 even though they had just "celebrated" an anniversary for it 5 years earlier. I'm glad JP had the sense to stop the anniversary bit with the last album-tour cycle. Had they done something for SDoIT (which is one of my favorite albums) they would have gone full on into Yes territory with being a pure nostalgia act. Thankfully that didn't happen.

Yes.
 
 

Great point Timmay. MP definitely paid attention to what JL was capable of and what he realistically wasn't. It's interesting because they did do the full version of TtT during the 2007 summer warm up tour, but only when they were playing IaW in full. Otherwise, MP made sure the abridged version of TtT was played, and IIRC was also careful about where he placed it in the set because of JL. Likewise, MP also had them do an abridged version of Voices since (I believe) the 2002 tour as JL was struggling with that one even back then. The irony of it was, either JP and/or JL wanted to do the full versions of those songs - I recall reading some comments in at least one interview saying as much - but MP insisted otherwise.

I heard the version of TtT with the different vocal melody in the third verse and I thought it was fine. You could throw a different vocal melody in the heavy verse of Voices too. Just abridging songs feels really really weird. Ruins the flow.

Come at me, bro!!!!!      Kidding.

The problem is the "implication" to begin with.  I think it's unsound based on what was actually said.  I'm not saying it's not TRUE - it's certainly possible - I'm just saying it's kind of unfair at worst and biased at best to take that implication from what we have of what was said.

I think the major piece is what isn't there - MP's not the type play it close to the vest when he's excited about something. It is of course possible that MP is interested in the Mangini stuff but the way the question was phrased caught him off guard, but that would be out of character.

[ReaPsTA]

[snipped - Hypothetical reunion timeline]

IMO this makes sense.

I don't mind a band celebrating an album anniversary, especially if done separately from a tour supporting a new album, or a second leg, but to do it repeatedly gets old. And it was starting to get old with DT. 2014 had half of Awake and 1/3 of SFaM, which I agree was fine. Then they did all of The Astonishing in 2016, which I was fine with and understood even if it's my least favorite album. But then they started to milk it with the IWaB tour and definitely crossed the line IMO when they did all of SFaM in 2019-20 even though they had just "celebrated" an anniversary for it 5 years earlier. I'm glad JP had the sense to stop the anniversary bit with the last album-tour cycle. Had they done something for SDoIT (which is one of my favorite albums) they would have gone full on into Yes territory with being a pure nostalgia act. Thankfully that didn't happen.

Yes.
 
 

Great point Timmay. MP definitely paid attention to what JL was capable of and what he realistically wasn't. It's interesting because they did do the full version of TtT during the 2007 summer warm up tour, but only when they were playing IaW in full. Otherwise, MP made sure the abridged version of TtT was played, and IIRC was also careful about where he placed it in the set because of JL. Likewise, MP also had them do an abridged version of Voices since (I believe) the 2002 tour as JL was struggling with that one even back then. The irony of it was, either JP and/or JL wanted to do the full versions of those songs - I recall reading some comments in at least one interview saying as much - but MP insisted otherwise.

I heard the version of TtT with the different vocal melody in the third verse and I thought it was fine. You could throw a different vocal melody in the heavy verse of Voices too. Just abridging songs feels really really weird. Ruins the flow.

EDIT: I have a feeling that part of why there might be shyness about tweaking the vocal melodies is because of how poorly "the note" in Learning to Live goes over if it's not gone for. But that's such a specific thing.

Come at me, bro!!!!!      Kidding.

The problem is the "implication" to begin with.  I think it's unsound based on what was actually said.  I'm not saying it's not TRUE - it's certainly possible - I'm just saying it's kind of unfair at worst and biased at best to take that implication from what we have of what was said.

I think the major piece is what isn't there - MP's not the type play it close to the vest when he's excited about something. It is of course possible that MP is interested in the Mangini stuff but the way the question was phrased caught him off guard, but that would be out of character.

[gzarruk]

The only thing I'll add to the MP wanting/not wanting to play MM era songs discussion is that I just hope he sees it as a big and important era of the band, and not just a period where he wasn't around. I'm not implying at all he feels a certain way or not, btw.

In my opinion, the biggest issue here is that MP isn't a new guy joining a band he had nothing to do prior to that, rather he's returning to a band he helped create and with which he spent 25 years. Because of that, I totally get the desire to favor stuff from his era of the band, but there's over 13 years and 5 albums between his last album with them (BC&SL) and the yet non-existent DT16. To come back and immediately ignore most of what happened for the last 13 years would make them dive even more into nostalgia act waters (ignoring your most recent material, playing mostly the classics, etc). Again, this is pure speculation, as we don't know what's going to happen.

This is why the way they structure their tours moving forward is so important. They're at a point where their new album won't come out, realistically, in about a little less than a year. Are they going to wait for the album to release before touring? I think it's likely they'll do a warmup tour before the album is out, so they can play the classics, get them out of their system, and then support DT16 with a much more modern DT setlist? The problem is, DT16 will be out pretty close to their 40th anniversary, which I'm sure they're going to try to acknowledge in a big way, but that's yet another "nostalgia" thing to keep in mind.

[bosk1]

In my opinion, the biggest issue here is that MP isn't a new guy joining a band he had nothing to do prior to that, rather he's returning to a band he helped create and with which he spent 25 years. Because of that, I totally get the desire to favor stuff from his era of the band, but there's over 13 years and 5 albums between his last album with them (BC&SL) and the yet non-existent DT16. To come back and immediately ignore most of what happened for the last 13 years would make them dive even more into nostalgia act waters (ignoring your most recent material, playing mostly the classics, etc). Again, this is pure speculation, as we don't know what's going to happen.

Except that, at least as of right now, it's NOT an issue at all because nobody has said that the Mangini era material is going to be ignored or that material from the next album will be given short shrift.  Nobody.  MP literally said he would play anything.  He then expanded and said what he is looking forward to playing, and some of you for some reason insist on acting like that completely negates him saying he will play anything.  SMH.  If he had been even more specific and said, "Yeah, I'd really like to play Home, The Shattered Fortress, and Octavarium," would it be correct for people to react like "MP said he won't play anything from the first four albums, Six Degrees, TOT, or SC!  Oh no!"?  No, that wouldn't make sense. 

If the guy says he is open to playing anything, then the only logical assumption one can make is that he is open to playing anything.  (unless you think he is lying)  No issue there.  As you point out, he was in the band for the first 25 years of its existence, and he hasn't gotten to play most of these songs in the past 13 years, and especially hasn't had the opportunity to play them with the other guys that created them.  Of course it would be natural if he felt and expressed a preference to play that stuff again.  Again, no issue here.

[ReaPsTA]

In my opinion, the biggest issue here is that MP isn't a new guy joining a band he had nothing to do prior to that, rather he's returning to a band he helped create and with which he spent 25 years. Because of that, I totally get the desire to favor stuff from his era of the band, but there's over 13 years and 5 albums between his last album with them (BC&SL) and the yet non-existent DT16. To come back and immediately ignore most of what happened for the last 13 years would make them dive even more into nostalgia act waters (ignoring your most recent material, playing mostly the classics, etc). Again, this is pure speculation, as we don't know what's going to happen.

Except that, at least as of right now, it's NOT an issue at all because nobody has said that the Mangini era material is going to be ignored or that material from the next album will be given short shrift.  Nobody.  MP literally said he would play anything.  He then expanded and said what he is looking forward to playing, and some of you for some reason insist on acting like that completely negates him saying he will play anything.  SMH.  If he had been even more specific and said, "Yeah, I'd really like to play Home, The Shattered Fortress, and Octavarium," would it be correct for people to react like "MP said he won't play anything from the first four albums, Six Degrees, TOT, or SC!  Oh no!"?  No, that wouldn't make sense. 

If the guy says he is open to playing anything, then the only logical assumption one can make is that he is open to playing anything.  (unless you think he is lying)  No issue there.  As you point out, he was in the band for the first 25 years of its existence, and he hasn't gotten to play most of these songs in the past 13 years, and especially hasn't had the opportunity to play them with the other guys that created them.  Of course it would be natural if he felt and expressed a preference to play that stuff again.  Again, no issue here.

I think MP's answer was honest.

If the band said "the problem with the MM era wasn't the music, we want to make sure we keep those songs in the rotation", I think MP would go with it.

But if MP gets control of the setlists back (realistic I think, since his success there is proven), what do you think he would do with the MM era songs?

[Skeever]

I've got a crazy idea here, but when Dream Theater come back they're going to play anywhere from 40 to 100% of their newest album. Then they are going to play a song or two from most of their albums, maybe highlighting a few fan favorites.

[ReaPsTA]

I've got a crazy idea here, but when Dream Theater come back they're going to play anywhere from 40 to 100% of their newest album. Then they are going to play a song or two from most of their albums, maybe highlighting a few fan favorites.

Realistic scenario

[Setlist Scotty]

But if MP gets control of the setlists back (realistic I think, since his success there is proven), what do you think he would do with the MM era songs?

I think he would naturally give the preference to the material he was involved with, although that doesn't mean he wouldn't include anything from the MM-era on his own accord. But the same thing would be true if JL or JR was responsible for doing the setlists, too. They wouldn't naturally include anything from WDaDU or (in JR's case) anything from the first 4 albums because they weren't involved in their creation and don't have a connection to those songs. In fact, MP has even said that he's the only one who would really fight to include stuff from WDaDU or even the Majesty demos because neither JP nor JM really cares to revisit that stuff.  And yet they played that material when MP was doing the setlists in the past. So I think the reverse can be true too if JP and/or the rest of the band permits MP to write the setlists again, but with the requirement that he include a certain number of songs from the MM-era even though he wasn't involved in their making.

[cramx3]

Wouldn't it be funny if MP only performed MM songs that MM never got to perform. 

[ReaPsTA]

But if MP gets control of the setlists back (realistic I think, since his success there is proven), what do you think he would do with the MM era songs?

I think he would naturally give the preference to the material he was involved with, although that doesn't mean he wouldn't include anything from the MM-era on his own accord. But the same thing would be true if JL or JR was responsible for doing the setlists, too. They wouldn't naturally include anything from WDaDU or (in JR's case) anything from the first 4 albums because they weren't involved in their creation and don't have a connection to those songs. In fact, MP has even said that he's the only one who would really fight to include stuff from WDaDU or even the Majesty demos because neither JP nor JM really cares to revisit that stuff.  And yet they played that material when MP was doing the setlists in the past. So I think the reverse can be true too if JP and/or the rest of the band permits MP to write the setlists again, but with the requirement that he include a certain number of songs from the MM-era even though he wasn't involved in their making.

Also realistic.

Wouldn't it be funny if MP only performed MM songs that MM never got to perform. 

That would be... something.

[porcacultor]

I have two bones to give to a few dogs here:

As much as MP-less DT wasn't as adept at audience engagement with peripheral content as MP was, there has been a history of some pretty entertaining extra-album content. I remember a collective video chat moderated by Weymolith before the release of the self-titled album that was truly fun and brought context about some tracks (I remember Jordan playing the "easter egg" section from the end of Illumination Theory, for instance). And before the release of DoT they did a series of Instagram stories and had JP and JR "sing" their favorite riffs from the album (I think JP sang his part on the Room 137 riff and JR sang something from Pale Blue Dot I believe). So it's not like they didn't try.

I do think with the liner notes on the Official Bootlegs MP was kind of the collective "voice" of the band, and I did miss that aspect in recent years. It's something that I quietly hope to come back.

Now for the second bone: some other users have alluded to this, and I think it's entirely possible that MP can also fall in love (a strong expression, but let's go with that) with the material made in his absence. Let's say the discussion of a new setlist comes in and they decide to play The Looking Glass (I was going to say Surrender to Reason, but it feels like I'm always bringing that one up). He sits down to make his drum arrangement, feels proud about both his adaptation and his mates' work on it. It's not a given, but there could be room in his heart for this material.

Wouldn't it be funny if MP only performed MM songs that MM never got to perform. 

Yes it would. And stop feeding my Surrender-to-Reason-live-debut craving ass!

[cramx3]

Wouldn't it be funny if MP only performed MM songs that MM never got to perform. 

Yes it would. And stop feeding my Surrender-to-Reason-live-debut craving ass!

S2N would be what I'd most be craving, but yeah, Id enjoy seeing that too

[Stadler]

But if MP gets control of the setlists back (realistic I think, since his success there is proven), what do you think he would do with the MM era songs?

Honestly?  I think he would treat it like any other part of the catalogue in the sense that, if he sensed the fan base was screaming for a particular song, either because they've never played it, or it hadn't been played in a while, I think he would put "x" in whether it was pre-2010 or post-2010.

Is he going to design an "all-Mangini" set? Not likely.  Is he going to argue FOR playing "The Astonishing" in it's entirety?  Not likely.  But I would sincerely hope - and I firmly believe this will be the case, at least for the first tour or two - that if asked to present a suite of songs for the "upcoming tour", it will include Mangini songs.

Wouldn't it be funny if MP only performed MM songs that MM never got to perform. 

I mean, I get your point, but honestly, I don't think it's terribly unreasonable for the reasons I said above.  If it feeds the fanbase, I think it's got a better shot of being played.

[KevShmev]

I have a take on this:

I have followed MP and his career since 2002, when I became familiar with progressive music. I have watched every single video on Dream Theater - whether it be a studio video, a tour diary or even other people talking about DT etc. I have a copy of and read the official biography too.

My theory is that mainly due to family obligations, DT started to transform from a band to a business after the problems they had during the FII era. The music got more formulaic and the changing music industry environment meant that they had to rely more on touring income than the album royalties but they could only be on the road for 4 weeks at a time because they are family men now. (Which is totally understandable.) At the same time, their fame within the musician circles led to additional income such as the ability to attach their names to gear, with the most successful one being the JP line of guitars. So much so that Petrucci now writes songs because there's a new piece of equipment coming out: Awaken the Master is promotional material for the 8-string JP guitar.

My experience in the music industry has taught me that if you achieve fame through your ability with any given instrument, there's an unwritten obligation to push the boundaries of what is possible with that instrument. The 2000's is when MP became the weakest instrumental member of Dream Theater, he stopped doing clinics and solos, and started referring to himself as a groove and feel drummer and given how he started his career, this could be considered a regression. I think/know some of his endorsement deals came very close to a termination within the last decade.

My guess is that MP had always been the "widest musical horizon" member of Dream Theater. The others do not stray far from familiar grounds when it comes to musical preferences. (Other than JP introducing MP to Muse but that could be considered an anomaly in DT's case.) When he left DT, he spun it as "exploring new musical avenues". At the time, he was starstruck with the reception that A7X had on the road, a level of reception that he never had with DT and when that ended, he wanted to replicate that success with Adrenaline Mob which did not work and the band did not have any sort of commercial success whatsoever, he ended up leaving. The other guys wanted to hustle and do the small club tours but he did not see this as being MP-level when push came to shove.

He tried to please the fans with his prog side, pop side, metal side and all the other sides available to mankind but after more than a decade of trying to get things off the ground, the only somewhat successful outing of his has been the Winery Dogs as that sort of dad rock always has an audience. In my opinion, the TWD success is due to Richie Kotzen putting the break on things when he deemed necessary instead of having an industrial level output that other Portnoy projects are known for. When it came time to do the TWD albums and tours, things remained fresh for the band and the fans - it's like squeezing and orange but stopping when the juicer hits the peel. MP usually tries to juice the peel too.

Noticing that the fans wanted the prog metal experience from him after the positive reaction to the PSMS shows, he put together SoA - two ex-DT members trying to out-play Dream Theater. I think this was the project that he was most hopeful about, in terms of experiencing the good old days but it didn't work out that way and that was an eye-opener for him. They thought that putting 5 high profile guys in a room would result in instant success and it did not happen. I think when it comes to his commitments to bands, MP is an emotional person, so when things do not work out, he reacts in a big way. At the end of the day, Dream Theater is what made him and the shadow of Dream Theater will always follow him around. He has not managed to loom larger than the shadow of Dream Theater since he left the band in 2010.

He's knows it and he isn't wrong when he allegedly said "It's what people want." - He can say this, because he has tried everything else. The MP brand isn't enough to entice people, no matter how hardcore his core fanbase is. This is true for other members and ex-members of Dream Theater as well. Sherinian had a 5-year stint with the band and he'll always be known for that despite having done more outside DT than within it. This happens with bands that become the gateway to their genre. The Waters-Gilmour push and pull created Pink Floyd, a similar circumstance is true for Dream Theater as well. It is just the way it is.

This post was a very interested read. 

[ReaPsTA]

Now for the second bone: some other users have alluded to this, and I think it's entirely possible that MP can also fall in love (a strong expression, but let's go with that) with the material made in his absence. Let's say the discussion of a new setlist comes in and they decide to play The Looking Glass (I was going to say Surrender to Reason, but it feels like I'm always bringing that one up). He sits down to make his drum arrangement, feels proud about both his adaptation and his mates' work on it. It's not a given, but there could be room in his heart for this material.

This is a realistic path to the good ending.

Yes it would. And stop feeding my Surrender-to-Reason-live-debut craving ass!

Surrender to Reason is good.

Honestly?  I think he would treat it like any other part of the catalogue in the sense that, if he sensed the fan base was screaming for a particular song, either because they've never played it, or it hadn't been played in a while, I think he would put "x" in whether it was pre-2010 or post-2010.

Probably true.

I think the momentum right now probably leans toward the classic material. Curious how that will evolve in the future.

Is he going to design an "all-Mangini" set? Not likely.  Is he going to argue FOR playing "The Astonishing" in it's entirety?  Not likely.

Let's not get crazy now.

But I would sincerely hope - and I firmly believe this will be the case, at least for the first tour or two - that if asked to present a suite of songs for the "upcoming tour", it will include Mangini songs.

Hope is a funny thing...

[gmillerdrake]

There was a tweet/social media post some time ago where MP shared a snapshot of his playlist.....and....Illumination Theory was on there. I could see him wanting to tackle that one.

[emtee]

I also have a strong sense, based on nothing except my perception that they want to create something truly special on #16, that the first proper tour will be #16 in its entirety.  And then set 2 will be some classics and 1 or 2 from MM's era.

[ReaPsTA]

There was a tweet/social media post some time ago where MP shared a snapshot of his playlist.....and....Illumination Theory was on there. I could see him wanting to tackle that one.

Pog