Dream Theater

Squonk · 2012-05-14T15:33:52+00:00

I have tried yet again to understand Dream Theater and all things Petrucci! Watching Live DVD Metropolis 2000... Brilliant musicians, especially the Bassist, but even that's a bit unfair as they are all exceptional. What I can't get is the Lead Vocalist and the the song constructions. Some hectically brilliant prog rock pieces until the vocals start, to me there seems to be no creativity whatsoever with the melodies that the vocalist sings. And I comment from being a huge Prog Rock Fan, If you have to listen to Porcupine Tree, and I also can't handle Steve Wilson's vocals but there is creativity in their Songs. To me they would be better as an Instrumental band, but they would have work on a bit more variety. What else must I listen to to understand this Band?

Clint-Green

X-rated Bob wrote
Clint Green wrote I agree to a certain extent regarding the songs. They do have a great deal of really good songs (Another Day is a prime example) but a lot of them are kind of boring.
Well in general I think we have to accept a bum album every now and then. Bands are signed to contracts which bind them, amongst other things, to deliver so many albums in such-and-such a time (though the cycles are longer now than they once were) and it must get to a point where they HAVE to release an album even if they don't have a good set of songs or half-finished songs.

It's easier if you don't write your own material or have an audience that will not have a knee jerk rejection of material from elsewhere (Clapton, for example, can choose material from all over the place and put his own personal stamp on it).

There are artists who have long runs of creativity with loads of strong songs, but they're exceptional enough that it's remarked upon.

With everything else that goes on, the touring, the practising on one's instrument, all the aspects of a professional music career, the need to have an actual life, the demands on having records out in sufficient quantity and at the required times it's not easy to sustain compositional excellence. I think it may be harder in a band where everybody wants to have their 5c worth and so compromises may be necessary.

I totally understand the idea of label pressure to produce but when I read articles like this I tend to wonder whether they perhaps spent months working out all of the tie-ins and twists before realizing "oh crap, we need to write some actual melodies, the album needs to be finished next week!:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octavarium_(song)

Okay, maybe that was a bit of a dick thing to say, I still love Dream Theater and have the utmost respect for them and I think that they are a band who writes for themselves; what THEY enjoy. If other people like it, that's great, and if they don't, that's fine too. I've decided to take the same exact approach to making music this past year or so and I've never been happier ?

Bob-Dubery

Clint Green wrote Absolutely yes, but I still believe that a good band or songwriter should recognize good hooks in songs and utilize them. I'm not saying write a hook-laden verse-chorus-verse pop song, but if you want your listeners to stay interested, emphasise the really good melodies instead of just keeping them as a passing thought.

I know it's easy to sit and commentate from the sidelines so again, this is what I personally would prefer to hear and what I would do when writing prog. Lots of ideas, interesting melodic and timing changes = prog for sure, but too many and it just becomes boring IMO...

Sure, but different people go for different things. Married friends of mine have occasional arguments about what they're going to listen to because he responds more to melodic content (this is classical music mostly, so think Beethoven) and she responds more to interesting harmonic ideas and less to melody (think of the famous Old Spice advert). I don't "get" a lot of prog rock and the various off shoots, though I can acknowledge the high skill levels involved. However, a lot of people do (or allow themselves to get talked into seeing the Emperor's new clothes).

People change too. Looking back now I can't think what I ever found appealing in Yes (other than the Roger Dean covers) or Emerson, Lake and Palmer - unless it was the chops and the displays of the chops and the pompous lyrics. However back then I didn't "get" the Incredible String Band (who, I think, were the unknowing forefathers of prog rock) but now I most certainly do.

I have a friend who is heavily into Ozric Tentacles. I can't see the attraction myself, but there you go. What floats one boat does not float another, and the fact that somebody has a recording contract implies that enough people are buying the records to make it worth the artist's and the label's time and investment.

Clint-Green

X-rated Bob wrote
Clint Green wrote Absolutely yes, but I still believe that a good band or songwriter should recognize good hooks in songs and utilize them. I'm not saying write a hook-laden verse-chorus-verse pop song, but if you want your listeners to stay interested, emphasise the really good melodies instead of just keeping them as a passing thought.

I know it's easy to sit and commentate from the sidelines so again, this is what I personally would prefer to hear and what I would do when writing prog. Lots of ideas, interesting melodic and timing changes = prog for sure, but too many and it just becomes boring IMO...
Sure, but different people go for different things. Married friends of mine have occasional arguments about what they're going to listen to because he responds more to melodic content (this is classical music mostly, so think Beethoven) and she responds more to interesting harmonic ideas and less to melody (think of the famous Old Spice advert). I don't "get" a lot of prog rock and the various off shoots, though I can acknowledge the high skill levels involved. However, a lot of people do (or allow themselves to get talked into seeing the Emperor's new clothes).

People change too. Looking back now I can't think what I ever found appealing in Yes (other than the Roger Dean covers) or Emerson, Lake and Palmer - unless it was the chops and the displays of the chops and the pompous lyrics. However back then I didn't "get" the Incredible String Band (who, I think, were the unknowing forefathers of prog rock) but now I most certainly do.

I have a friend who is heavily into Ozric Tentacles. I can't see the attraction myself, but there you go. What floats one boat does not float another, and the fact that somebody has a recording contract implies that enough people are buying the records to make it worth the artist's and the label's time and investment.

Agreed ? You are quite right, at the end of the day it is all about different strokes for different folks!

Squonk

In all my years of Progressive Rock I have found that the North American prog rockers tend to be better musicians and more technical and their UK counterparts a lot more creative in their songwriting.

And I know Progressive Rock is type of Genre that limits rather than classifying a band or artist.

But have a listen to:

Emerson, Lake and Palmer
Soft Machine
Barclay James Harvest
Gentle Giant
Yes (not the Trevor Rabin Pop Band of the 80's)
Van Der Graaf Generator
King Crimson
Pink Floyd (although they would be the odd band in this list)
Genesis (Not the Phil Collins Earth, Wind and Fire wannabes of the 80's)

there are plenty more and I am only including the earlier pioneers of this genre.
I admit that Prog Rock can get up it's own arse sometimes and have these mundane long songs that you most probably have to consume magic mushrooms to appreciate.

Peter Gabriel's Genesis released some hugely creative and extremely artistic albums in the 70's that have all the complex riffology, well constructed songs with great lyrics(Yes XRB), excellent musicianship and very clever songwriting. And the Album was a whole. You could listen from track 1 till track 5, did I mention that the songs were long ?

Rush , Dixie Dreggs and Kansas came along in the mid 70's and to a degree imitated the UK scene until they developed their own sound.

I recently bought Genesis - Selling England by the Pound and Kansas - Leftoverture and while driving my 10 year son to football practice a couple of times a week, I am teaching him slowly about the different types of music and what instrument is that etc. He made a remark that took me by surprise, especially for a 10 year old.

I played him Genesis and explained to him the difference between Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins, why the songs are so long and complex and why the Lyrics weren't about love or sex. He is at the age where he asks plenty questions, that's why I teach him music, at least I can give answers ?

We then moved on to Kansas and he pointed out that they are trying to sound like Genesis. I listened carefully and this is the case. I had never noticed before. They obviously did have their own sound e.g. "Carry on the Wayward Son", "Dust in the Wind" etc, but on a lot of those earlier albums are long winded songs about Gnats etc with brilliant prog rock pieces that were as good as if not better than Genesis. BUT here it comes again, as soon as the vocalist starts singing(And he is a great vocalist, Steve Walsh) the tune is again bland and not complimentary to the music, a case of well played songs that are weak.

We haven't got to Rush yet, but they are a classy band, excellent musicians, great song writers, although they did have some bleak periods.
I think I am going to start him off with 2112, Hemispheres before moving on the great 80's albums "Moving Pictures" etc. Hope he can handle Geddy Lee's voice

Don't know what my point is but I have just realized that my Prog Rock roots are deep

Bob-Dubery

Squonk wrote Peter Gabriel's Genesis released some hugely creative and extremely artistic albums in the 70's that have all the complex riffology, well constructed songs with great lyrics(Yes XRB), excellent musicianship and very clever songwriting. And the Album was a whole. You could listen from track 1 till track 5, did I mention that the songs were long ?

But that's the thing. For me it's nothing to do with genres. It's about whether or not the music satisfies (and that may be different for each of us). Genres are a trap. We should be listening to and experiencing music at a higher level than that, or disregarding them completely. The latter may be more fun - you give yourself a license to listen to and enjoy "prog", "folk", "punk", "reggae" and any thing else you can or cannot define.

Squonk

X-rated Bob wrote
Squonk wrote Peter Gabriel's Genesis released some hugely creative and extremely artistic albums in the 70's that have all the complex riffology, well constructed songs with great lyrics(Yes XRB), excellent musicianship and very clever songwriting. And the Album was a whole. You could listen from track 1 till track 5, did I mention that the songs were long ?
But that's the thing. For me it's nothing to do with genres. It's about whether or not the music satisfies (and that may be different for each of us). Genres are a trap. We should be listening to and experiencing music at a higher level than that, or disregarding them completely. The latter may be more fun - you give yourself a license to listen to and enjoy "prog", "folk", "punk", "reggae" and any thing else you can or cannot define.

I get you Bob. But this is a specific genre and I did state that it does limit a band/ artist by calling them Prog Rock, but I cant think of any thing else to categorize this type of music to make certain points that I did. And you know that a whole bunch of music satisfies me, Metal, BLues, Country, Jazz, Folk and now I am even touching sides with some Balkan stuff thanks to Greg.

The whole point of this thread was Great Musicians vs Good Songwriting and this applies to all the genres!

I wasn't promoting Prog Rock or music that I like! I think I was just sharing a bit too much, but I don't have anyone else to share this with ?

How many Genesis fans do you know? It's like my football team Derby County, I think I am the only fan in RSA ?

Dingwall

I agree with Bob, I think 'genre's' should be illegal (like any other label in society). I don't believe any of the great bands set out to sound in a 'specific' way - it's all sorts of weird and wonderful connections mixed with 'influences' and socio-political 'currents' that ultimately define the real pioneers!

BMU

The first post pretty much sums up my feelings too. I have been a huge DT fan, Awake is genius. But on the whole I'd love to fire the pompous vocalist, overbearing pianist and make them a kick ass instrumental trio.

« Previous Page