DREAM THEATER ANNOUNCE THE RETURN OF DRUMMER MIKE PORTNOY

[Stadler]

Random, but I decided to go back watch some old Dream Theater documentaries, mainly the Score one and Systematic Chaos ones. Man... I had forgotten how overpowering MP's personality can be sometimes. The Systematic Chaos documentary in particular is like 75% him (at least in terms of people talking).

He also directed it which in retrospect looks pretty tacky. Almost like, "check out this documentary about ME! Also featuring the band I'm the leader of."

To be honest, at the time I had no issue with it. He was so vocal about being "the leader" that I at one point assumed he had finagled his was into a majority ownership position. Because of that I thought the band was done when he left.

Now we know he probably only owned 20% of Dream Theater but, for lack of a better term, "bullied" his way into that position. I'm sure Petrucci was not ok with constantly hearing Portnoy claim to be the leader of a band that Petrucci himself had a heavy hand in.

In a recent interview Mike talked about the dynamics of him returning and he was very gracious about respecting their 13 years without him and referencing that when he was in the band he and Petrucci had been the leaders. He then referenced all of the other things he for all intents and purposes was the leader of but didn't use that term and instead referred to his "roles."

All this is to say that, while old habits die hard, it gives me a lot of hope for him giving the band room to breathe and respecting what each member brings even if he does pick up some of his old roles, but not necessarily old habits.

In at least one of the documentaries - I can't remember which one, though I think it was the one where they spend some time talking to the lighting guy and how he "played" the lights like an instrument during the show - he noted that he directed them and was featured because he was the one that LIKED doing it, and some of the others (the implication was John Myung) just weren't interested in that kind of thing.  That's hardly "bullied".

And I would probably hold off on assuming any emotions by John. He's a strong-willed, capable man who is unassuming in public, but by all accounts is no pushover and no wallflower.  I think the breakdown was always one of "desire": John wanted to control the music and production part of things, and Mike wanted to control the art/messaging/documentary aspect of the band.  It's not for us to decide what someone was comfortable or not with.

[Stadler]

There are a 1000 ways that could have gone that are NOT "him being on the other end of a call in which he was told that Mike Portnoy will take over drumming responsibilities going forward".

You're clutching at straws. 

You're getting possibility confused with probability. Anyone can invent some hypothetical scenario, but that doesn't mean those scenarios are worthy of serious consideration.

DT wanted MP back. They told MM he had to leave. That's it.

One, I am listening to Fish at NEARFest right now, which was his "Clutching At Stars" tour; he played the bulk of Clutching At Straws, so maybe I AM!!!! 

And two, I am not confusing the two; I never said all of those 1000 things were equally likely; in fact, I said the opposite.  I am also not saying that "DT wanted MP back. They told MM he had to leave. That's it." may not be one of the more likely scenarios.   ALL I am saying is that YOU can't say that with any certainty.  And simply put, too many people here are saying that as if there are no other possibilities, and worse, ascribing emotions to that position.

[Indiscipline]

Random, but I decided to go back watch some old Dream Theater documentaries, mainly the Score one and Systematic Chaos ones. Man... I had forgotten how overpowering MP's personality can be sometimes. The Systematic Chaos documentary in particular is like 75% him (at least in terms of people talking).

He also directed it which in retrospect looks pretty tacky. Almost like, "check out this documentary about ME! Also featuring the band I'm the leader of."

To be honest, at the time I had no issue with it. He was so vocal about being "the leader" that I at one point assumed he had finagled his was into a majority ownership position. Because of that I thought the band was done when he left.

Now we know he probably only owned 20% of Dream Theater but, for lack of a better term, "bullied" his way into that position. I'm sure Petrucci was not ok with constantly hearing Portnoy claim to be the leader of a band that Petrucci himself had a heavy hand in.

In a recent interview Mike talked about the dynamics of him returning and he was very gracious about respecting their 13 years without him and referencing that when he was in the band he and Petrucci had been the leaders. He then referenced all of the other things he for all intents and purposes was the leader of but didn't use that term and instead referred to his "roles."

All this is to say that, while old habits die hard, it gives me a lot of hope for him giving the band room to breathe and respecting what each member brings even if he does pick up some of his old roles, but not necessarily old habits.

With all respect to your opinion, "bullying" your way to leaderhip in a group performance dynamic is simply impossible.

[Setlist Scotty]

Random, but I decided to go back watch some old Dream Theater documentaries, mainly the Score one and Systematic Chaos ones. Man... I had forgotten how overpowering MP's personality can be sometimes. The Systematic Chaos documentary in particular is like 75% him (at least in terms of people talking).

He also directed it which in retrospect looks pretty tacky. Almost like, "check out this documentary about ME! Also featuring the band I'm the leader of."

To be honest, at the time I had no issue with it. He was so vocal about being "the leader" that I at one point assumed he had finagled his was into a majority ownership position. Because of that I thought the band was done when he left.

Now we know he probably only owned 20% of Dream Theater but, for lack of a better term, "bullied" his way into that position. I'm sure Petrucci was not ok with constantly hearing Portnoy claim to be the leader of a band that Petrucci himself had a heavy hand in.

In a recent interview Mike talked about the dynamics of him returning and he was very gracious about respecting their 13 years without him and referencing that when he was in the band he and Petrucci had been the leaders. He then referenced all of the other things he for all intents and purposes was the leader of but didn't use that term and instead referred to his "roles."

All this is to say that, while old habits die hard, it gives me a lot of hope for him giving the band room to breathe and respecting what each member brings even if he does pick up some of his old roles, but not necessarily old habits.

In at least one of the documentaries - I can't remember which one, though I think it was the one where they spend some time talking to the lighting guy and how he "played" the lights like an instrument during the show - he noted that he directed them and was featured because he was the one that LIKED doing it, and some of the others (the implication was John Myung) just weren't interested in that kind of thing.  That's hardly "bullied".

Agreed. In all fairness, while there could be some argument that the other guys would have wanted to be involved with some of those things, it would never have been to the level of detail that MP always strove for. Take it from someone who designed several tourbooks and other things with him. He's very detail-oriented. Comparatively speaking, remember how JL was gonna take over doing the official bootlegs after MP split? It only took 11 years for that to finally happen, and it sounds like JP was more in the driver's seat when it did happen, so that seems to help affirm that point.
 
 

And I would probably hold off on assuming any emotions by John. He's a strong-willed, capable man who is unassuming in public, but by all accounts is no pushover and no wallflower.  I think the breakdown was always one of "desire": John wanted to control the music and production part of things, and Mike wanted to control the art/messaging/documentary aspect of the band.  It's not for us to decide what someone was comfortable or not with.

Exactly. And let's be clear too - it *always* was a partnership between MP and JP. That was stated as far back as 1999 when the changes were made and it was finally put forward that from that point onward MP and JP would co-captain the ship instead of pretending that it was a democracy like they previously had. However MP was always the one more focused on the creative end of things, whereas JP was always more focused on the business and sonic end of things (as was evident by his desire for SFaM to be remixed by Kevin Shirley).

Something that seems to irritate some is that MP ended up getting more interviews than anyone else. I think it can be attributed to a few things: MP is more publicly open than the other guys, he is more sociable within the music community and he seems more willing to do interviews/promotional things than the other guys (although that's not to say that the others are not). So I think all those factors play into why he usually did more interviews than anyone else.
 
 

One, I am listening to Fish at NEARFest right now, which was his "Clutching At Stars" tour; he played the bulk of Clutching At Straws, so maybe I AM!!!! 

Since you're speaking about Marillion, read your PMs Stads!

[gborland]

One, I am listening to Fish at NEARFest right now, which was his "Clutching At Stars" tour; he played the bulk of Clutching At Straws, so maybe I AM!!!! 

Awesome choice! Sl瀛nte Mhath. 🥃

[Schurftkut]

In at least one of the documentaries - I can't remember which one, though I think it was the one where they spend some time talking to the lighting guy and how he "played" the lights like an instrument during the show - he noted that he directed them and was featured because he was the one that LIKED doing it, and some of the others (the implication was John Myung) just weren't interested in that kind of thing.  That's hardly "bullied".

[/quote]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVOeiacJc_k&list=PL9931744435709E77

the 2nd tour with Jordan, also the first tour i saw them live. They look so exited with all the new things going on in their life!
But yeah, the lighting show isn't an excuse really for needing a click

[Madman Shepherd]

Random, but I decided to go back watch some old Dream Theater documentaries, mainly the Score one and Systematic Chaos ones. Man... I had forgotten how overpowering MP's personality can be sometimes. The Systematic Chaos documentary in particular is like 75% him (at least in terms of people talking).

He also directed it which in retrospect looks pretty tacky. Almost like, "check out this documentary about ME! Also featuring the band I'm the leader of."

To be honest, at the time I had no issue with it. He was so vocal about being "the leader" that I at one point assumed he had finagled his was into a majority ownership position. Because of that I thought the band was done when he left.

Now we know he probably only owned 20% of Dream Theater but, for lack of a better term, "bullied" his way into that position. I'm sure Petrucci was not ok with constantly hearing Portnoy claim to be the leader of a band that Petrucci himself had a heavy hand in.

In a recent interview Mike talked about the dynamics of him returning and he was very gracious about respecting their 13 years without him and referencing that when he was in the band he and Petrucci had been the leaders. He then referenced all of the other things he for all intents and purposes was the leader of but didn't use that term and instead referred to his "roles."

All this is to say that, while old habits die hard, it gives me a lot of hope for him giving the band room to breathe and respecting what each member brings even if he does pick up some of his old roles, but not necessarily old habits.

In at least one of the documentaries - I can't remember which one, though I think it was the one where they spend some time talking to the lighting guy and how he "played" the lights like an instrument during the show - he noted that he directed them and was featured because he was the one that LIKED doing it, and some of the others (the implication was John Myung) just weren't interested in that kind of thing.  That's hardly "bullied".

And I would probably hold off on assuming any emotions by John. He's a strong-willed, capable man who is unassuming in public, but by all accounts is no pushover and no wallflower.  I think the breakdown was always one of "desire": John wanted to control the music and production part of things, and Mike wanted to control the art/messaging/documentary aspect of the band.  It's not for us to decide what someone was comfortable or not with.

I wasn't referring to the lighting. There are plenty other instances where, like gzarruk said, Mike would wear the others down until they gave in. Whether bullying is the best term or not, he strong-armed the hell out of them until they gave in and eventually gave up all together.

I disagree that it's not for us to decide or in the case of message boards in general, speculate about JP's comfort, because why the hell not? But I wouldn't doubt if JP cared most about the music, obviously being the main songwriter, and chose his battles. Not that he was happy to relinquish creative control about album titles, artwork, etc but concentrated his energy elsewhere since Mike would fight so hard.

Random, but I decided to go back watch some old Dream Theater documentaries, mainly the Score one and Systematic Chaos ones. Man... I had forgotten how overpowering MP's personality can be sometimes. The Systematic Chaos documentary in particular is like 75% him (at least in terms of people talking).

He also directed it which in retrospect looks pretty tacky. Almost like, "check out this documentary about ME! Also featuring the band I'm the leader of."

To be honest, at the time I had no issue with it. He was so vocal about being "the leader" that I at one point assumed he had finagled his was into a majority ownership position. Because of that I thought the band was done when he left.

Now we know he probably only owned 20% of Dream Theater but, for lack of a better term, "bullied" his way into that position. I'm sure Petrucci was not ok with constantly hearing Portnoy claim to be the leader of a band that Petrucci himself had a heavy hand in.

In a recent interview Mike talked about the dynamics of him returning and he was very gracious about respecting their 13 years without him and referencing that when he was in the band he and Petrucci had been the leaders. He then referenced all of the other things he for all intents and purposes was the leader of but didn't use that term and instead referred to his "roles."

All this is to say that, while old habits die hard, it gives me a lot of hope for him giving the band room to breathe and respecting what each member brings even if he does pick up some of his old roles, but not necessarily old habits.

With all respect to your opinion, "bullying" your way to leaderhip in a group performance dynamic is simply impossible.

Whether bullying was the best term or not, I don't see how it's "impossible" in that dynamic.

[Indiscipline]

Whether bullying was the best term or not, I don't see how it's "impossible" in that dynamic.

If we agree leadership implies a level of acceptance, whether said leadership is organically determined by the group or imposed by an accepted higher authority, I can't see how any form of acceptance can coexist with the unilateral coercion implied by "bullying".

However, if by "bullying" you meant "imposing ideas and/or influencing group decisions by charisma and strength of personality and will", I can't deny the possibility, but I strongly oppose the term. Furthermore, we have found in 2011 that MP - even as band leader - couldn't impose every decision but could perfectly lose leadership while trying.     

[Stadler]

I wasn't referring to the lighting. There are plenty other instances where, like gzarruk said, Mike would wear the others down until they gave in. Whether bullying is the best term or not, he strong-armed the hell out of them until they gave in and eventually gave up all together.

I disagree that it's not for us to decide or in the case of message boards in general, speculate about JP's comfort, because why the hell not? But I wouldn't doubt if JP cared most about the music, obviously being the main songwriter, and chose his battles. Not that he was happy to relinquish creative control about album titles, artwork, etc but concentrated his energy elsewhere since Mike would fight so hard.

The lighting reference was only to identify the documentary to which I was referring, nothing else. 

I just think we're taking what might be isolated or limited examples and trying to make them be indicative.  I never once ever got the im0pression that EVERY ASPECT of DT was Mike bullying them until he wore them down and got his way.  There are too many comments and examples where the band was all in lock step, and those events of Mike wearing anyone down may only have been on the odd oaccasiton where they DIDN'T see eye-to-eye. We don't have a scorecard. 

But I refuse to accept that since it happened at least once, that that is how every encounter was and that we should form our opinions and emotions - sympathy for JP, antipathy for MP - on that.  People are different, dynamics are different.

[Stadler]

Whether bullying was the best term or not, I don't see how it's "impossible" in that dynamic.

If we agree leadership implies a level of acceptance, whether said leadership is organically determined by the group or imposed by an accepted higher authority, I can't see how any form of acceptance can coexist with the unilateral coercion implied by "bullying".

However, if by "bullying" you meant "imposing ideas and/or influencing group decisions by charisma and strength of personality and will", I can't deny the possibility, but I strongly oppose the term. Furthermore, we have found in 2011 that MP - even as band leader - couldn't impose every decision but could perfectly lose leadership while trying.   

And I wrote about this before: not every issue or decision carries equal weight and warrants the exact same reaction every time.

[MoraWintersoul]

And when the band came off tour this past summer/fall, and assessed "where do we go next", there was a discussion point about Mike M's solo record and with that the stars aligned.  I don't know what the EXACT conversation was like; it could have started with any of the five, and there are an almost infinite number of permutations, but the essence of it was "I think we're going to do this."  "I'm okay with that, just don't hang me out to dry in interviews!"  "Let's fucking go!"

I'll put in my penny into the hat and say the most likely conversation started with John Petrucci and any or all of the core Dream Theater members, then moved onto John asking Mike to come back, then moved onto Dream Theater telling Mike Mangini Mike Portnoy is coming back. That's what I thought from the first quote, that's what I think now and that may be what John might tell us himself if we get more of these specifics.

Possible scenario A: "So when I got this idea I wanted to hear with James first, because [said] he's been in the band for 30+ years and I wanted to hear his input, [unsaid] because he is the only one I imagine might possibly have some hangups with Mike returning."

Possible scenario B: "So when I got this idea I floated it by the band to see if everyone agrees and what everyone's input is. Then we talked with Mike Mangini", if he wanted to be very diplomatic or they really just had a band meeting about that.

Possible scenario C: "So when I got this idea I wanted to hear with Jordan, [possibly unsaid or said in other words] because he's been the co-leader of the band in certain aspects ever since Mike left." Put under C) only because Jordan would have been the first member of Dream Theater to enthusiastically welcome Mike back way before all the other guys.

If there was potential retirement planning or timelines for any of the members or the band itself I assume we'll only get to hear about it when the time actually approaches. I assume something like that has been talked about at least among the members planning for their eventual retirement in the next ten or so years. Their statements assure us this is going to last a while, but Mike in his interviews has touched on the fact that even though this chapter is going to be longer than your average last tour reunion, it still is the last chapter in a sense.

What is kind of brilliant about this, and what seems to be the whole point of a band having a leader instead of pretending they were a democracy like in the olden days, is the idea of John calling Mike. Instead of setting up a group call or being asked on behalf of the band, just having a kind of personal conversation about how it could turn out if it happened, and going from there. Because that's really what it's all about. Because there have been periods of time when Mike would have been extremely eager to rejoin and times where he would have just as likely said no, just going from what he said about it over the years and what he's saying now. Having a leader means someone has the blessing from the band to go about things their way, which both of them have had over the years, each in their area. Maybe Mike won it some times by the right of having the loudest opinion, but that's fair and square in a small group of people where everyone is also welcome to raise their voice if they actually care about something

[Mosh]

The fact that MP found himself out of the band when he tried to get them to take a 5 year hiatus is proof enough that there was no "bullying." And coupled with the fact that a lot of the roles that MP took on during his time in the band were either left empty by the band afterwards or, such as the case of the setlists, streamlined into a much simpler process, it seems like the band were just fine with MP's leadership role and the decisions he made in that capacity.

[Madman Shepherd]

The fact that MP found himself out of the band when he tried to get them to take a 5 year hiatus is proof enough that there was no "bullying." And coupled with the fact that a lot of the roles that MP took on during his time in the band were either left empty by the band afterwards or, such as the case of the setlists, streamlined into a much simpler process, it seems like the band were just fine with MP's leadership role and the decisions he made in that capacity.

So yeah, bullying wasn't the best term hence me using quotation marks but I disagree with your premise. Just because a bully doesn't get their way one time, doesn't mean they're not a bully.

But let's not get caught up on me using a poor term (at the moment I literally had a mind lapse and couldn't think of another term). Incessant strong arming might be better which mike has all but admitted to. I even remember him saying after the split that he was shocked and hurt that they let him make all the decisions but the one that he needed the most, the break, they wouldn't agree to. So sure, at any point they could have stood up to him and said "Mike, there's no way in hell were covering Made in Japan," but they may have been worn down to the point where mentally it was less hassle to put in countless hours of work rather than argue with him. Maybe. Or maybe they loved it.

So I'll refrain from using the term bullying and largely not even bring up the more frustrating parts of the past since its really cool to see where everyone is at. But if I do ill mostly stick to terms Mike himself used, and he used a lot.

[crystalstars17]

Random, but I decided to go back watch some old Dream Theater documentaries, mainly the Score one and Systematic Chaos ones. Man... I had forgotten how overpowering MP's personality can be sometimes. The Systematic Chaos documentary in particular is like 75% him (at least in terms of people talking).

He also directed it which in retrospect looks pretty tacky. Almost like, "check out this documentary about ME! Also featuring the band I'm the leader of."

I got that same vibe from those old documentaries and I hope we can assume that the absence of this is what is meant when it's said that everyone is different now and more mature and will have different roles.

All this is to say that, while old habits die hard, it gives me a lot of hope for him giving the band room to breathe and respecting what each member brings even if he does pick up some of his old roles, but not necessarily old habits.

I hope that is what the future brings and that those of us who have been skeptical will be pleasantly surprised.

[hefdaddy42]

Keep in mind that the main reason we even got those old documentaries and commentaries were because MP was behind them.  Otherwise, we would have had nothing, or next to nothing, in that vein, like we have had for the last 13 years.

Does MP come with pros and cons?  Of course, but so does everyone else.  MP's largely benefitted the fans, for the most part.

I don't for a second think things are going back to exactly the way they used to be.  But there will be some changes from the way things went for the last 13 years.  I'm most curious to see what changes are made.

[nobloodyname]

A sizeable part of DT's reputation was built on fan engagement, in all senses. And the vast majority of that was down to MP. Without it, it's debatable whether DT would even exist today.

[cramx3]

A sizeable part of DT's reputation was built on fan engagement, in all senses. And the vast majority of that was down to MP. Without it, it's debatable whether DT would even exist today.

Yeah, it also makes you wonder if a place like DTF even exists if the band didn't give the fans so much to talk about.  An outspoken band leader, rotating setlists, commentary... all leads to lots of discussions.  Just look at this thread as an example too.  MP clearly gets the conversation started.

[crystalstars17]

Just look at this thread as an example too.  MP clearly gets the conversation started.

I suppose, if you believe that "any press is good press".

[fadetoblackdude7]

Jordan is doing a brief eight-show tour with Dixie Dregs in April. Wonder if that値l interrupt the recording of the new album?

[TAC]

Jordan is doing a brief eight-show tour with Dixie Dregs in April. Wonder if that値l interrupt the recording of the new album?

I didn't know the Dregs were in the studio.. 

[hefdaddy42]

Jordan is doing a brief eight-show tour with Dixie Dregs in April. Wonder if that値l interrupt the recording of the new album?

We don't know their exact schedule, but it stands to reason that he likely wouldn't have accepted the gig if it would interfere with time DT was scheduled to be in the studio.

[fadetoblackdude7]

Jordan is doing a brief eight-show tour with Dixie Dregs in April. Wonder if that値l interrupt the recording of the new album?

We don't know their exact schedule, but it stands to reason that he likely wouldn't have accepted the gig if it would interfere with time DT was scheduled to be in the studio.

This is true. I知 starting to wonder if they値l wait til spring to enter the studio, like around May.

[TAC]

Jordan is doing a brief eight-show tour with Dixie Dregs in April. Wonder if that値l interrupt the recording of the new album?

We don't know their exact schedule, but it stands to reason that he likely wouldn't have accepted the gig if it would interfere with time DT was scheduled to be in the studio.

This is true. I知 starting to wonder if they値l wait til spring to enter the studio, like around May.

Who? DT?

My guess is their studio time runs from Jan-March. The album will likely be in the can by the time Jordan tours with the Dregs.

[gzarruk]

They only "need" to be together for the writing phase. Once everything is written and ready to record, they can take turns and Jordan/any other member could leave do something else while another one is recording and/or if they already finished tracking their parts. I don't think it'd be a problem at all.

[HOF]

Yeah, wouldn't surprise me if they were able to knock out most of the writing in February and March with a break for Jordan to go off with the Dixie Dregs in April (and whoever is left doing other stuff that can be done without him).

[cramx3]

Jordan is doing a brief eight-show tour with Dixie Dregs in April. Wonder if that値l interrupt the recording of the new album?

We don't know their exact schedule, but it stands to reason that he likely wouldn't have accepted the gig if it would interfere with time DT was scheduled to be in the studio.

This.

Also, I think the only thing we know is DT will be in the studio in early 2024 and that MP (and now JR) have some other scheduled events in early 2024 that DT needs to work around.

This all sounds like DT in the studio in February.  Just my guess.

Also, since it is their own studio, there's likely a lot more wiggle room in terms of timing than a typical band who will need to rent studio time.

[Zydar]

I thought I heard someone in the band say in an interview that they would enter the studio in January? Or did I just misunderstand that, and they just said early in the new year.

[Schurftkut]

MP did say that his new drumconfiguration for DT was already set-up in DTHQ, so preparations had been made already before the new year started.

[Dream Team]

So based on TheOutlawXanadu's post I also just re-watched the SC documentary because I definitely do remember MP being pretty annoying in that. But what actually came across the most was how much fun they were having in the studio, their creativity, and those sick drum parts MP was laying down in CM, TMoLS, and ITPoE.

[cramx3]

I thought I heard someone in the band say in an interview that they would enter the studio in January? Or did I just misunderstand that, and they just said early in the new year.

My recollection, and I could be wrong, was they stated early in the year.  MP had a few random things set up throughout January so I guess it's possible the guys are working on stuff remotely, there was no real reason to think the whole band, including MP, were in the studio in January.  Once again, I could be wrong here.

[Setlist Scotty]

MP's exact words in the long Drumeo video were

We're gonna start work on a new album right after the new year.

So that suggests January, but it could be starting in February, too. My guess is that they'll first reconvene after MP's MA gig. Dunno if he'll appear at NAMM, but since it runs from Jan 25-28, it stands to reason that he'll be there since the MA gig is on the 25th. So I would imagine they'll start up within the last couple days of January. And while they are probably organizing and perhaps sharing some of the individual song ideas they've come up with, I doubt they'll work together on stuff remotely.

[gborland]

Right after the new year means 2025 (since 2024 is the new year they're referring to), right?

[Stadler]

Just look at this thread as an example too.  MP clearly gets the conversation started.

I suppose, if you believe that "any press is good press".

Why do you assume this stuff is "bad", or that it should be "bad"?  I'm not here AT ALL if not for Mike Portnoy (no jokes, please). 

I got into DT back in '92 with the first album.  I was already moving on from metal to prog, and it wasn't really my wheelhouse, but as I learned more about the band - local to me (they played absolute DUMPS in Connecticut for many years) - I realized they were something special.   It wasn't JUST about the music, it was about the community, almost like the Dead.  What you call "tacky" - and I understand why you say that - is part of the charm for me.  They were bold, proud, and trying to do something different, and as a fan that was just as obsessive about the bands I like, it RESONATED.   

I like a lot of bands.  My top 20 or so is almost interchangeable.  I have 2500 CDs in the next room.  I CONSUME music.  So it takes something to set a band apart.  Sure, bands like Genesis, Maiden, Kiss, Sabbath, Beatles, Zeppelin are special to me, but Dream Theater is something more.

Everything I like about those bands, DT takes to a different level.  And I'm sorry, no knock on Mike Mangini, phenomenal drummer and all around great guy, but when Portnoy left, they went from "God-tier" to "one of many really awesome bands".  I can safely say that other than a complete fluke, I will NEVER get to meet any of Genesis.  Or Sabbath.  Or The Beatles (even MIKE was thrilled to have met Sir Paul).  Even Maiden are not really fan-friendly in that way.   Mike?  I've met him several times.  They are very accessible.  Granted it's not always gone well, but there's actually a chance you can X or whatever a message to Mike and he will answer.  I have an experience I can't really share the details on, but they - the organization - KNOWS we exist and more or less CARES about us.  I was on the Genesis forum and the Phil Collins forum for a while and Phil made like one post, it was HIGHLY defensive and negative, and it was like "why bother"?    These other bands dabble, and DT delivered.   

Mike's a completist.   Kiss box set?  Chock full of rarities, but "one of two songs" recorded by, or "one of three songs" from the demo. Genesis archive sets? Three songs missing because the band "didn't like them anymore".  Mike puts BOTH songs recorded by, ALL the songs from the demo, and a complete set.  Even DT without Mike... releases half a show on one disk (no encore) and the other half on another disk (no encore) and... there's no mention of said encore.  He would have at LEAST said why it wasn't released. On one of the Flying Colors live disks, there was a line in the liner notes about an impromptu jam of "Space Truckin'" by Deep Purple.  Bummer that it wasn't in the track list, but sunovabitch if on the Blu-ray there wasn't a hidden file of.... the Space Truckin' jam.  HE GETS IT.

Look, if these things don't matter to you I understand.  But for some of us they do and they need to be factored in when judging things that happened in some cases 20 or more years ago.

[hefdaddy42]

Right after the new year means 2025 (since 2024 is the new year they're referring to), right?

Jeez

[Dream Team]

Good post Stadler.