Dream Theater Vs Pink Floyd
 

Alright so I've done my research and what we have here is what I believe to be the most popular progressive metal band versus the most popular progressive rock band.
Musically, DT owns PF no questions, but what about everything else? Instead of putting a category on this I'll just pose the question: Which band do you prefer? Also put your age along side your post if you want, purely for my interest.

Definitely prefer Pink Floyd. I guess for reasons such as songwriting, lyrics & concepts, style etc... But undoubtedly Dream Theater is technically superior to Pink Floyd. I'm 17 btw.

Wow, I don't think many your age would prefer PF over DT. I agree PF are superior in the lyrics department. DT's songs are just so addictive and I don't like how PF create mostly ominous and eerie moods throughout some of their albums.

Haha me and Don have already had a similar discussion on this. I prefer Pink Floyd and it's because they intrigue me far more in their concepts and music then DT do. In my opinion, with DT you get flat out Prog Metal and they're not, to me, half as enchanting as Pink Floyd.

I'd have to say DT are a band of champions, while PF are a champion band. I'm 18. Pink Floyd.

definitely pink floyd. like merkaba said, pink floyd just has something for me that dream theater doesnt.

so...pink floyd. im 15.

Definitely Dream Theater for me. Pink Floyd are good but in my opinion no where near as amazing as DT. I'm 17.

Hmm the pioneers of psychadelia AND stadium rock vs a bunch of humourless musos who are more interested in wanking over their instruments than writing anything compelling.

Tough choice

Edit: would someone please explain to me why Dream Theater are considered 'progressive'
I thought overlong guitar solos & high pitched vocals went out in the 80s.Doesn`t progressive mean progressing in your music rather than sounding like a relic from 20 years ago.

Most definetly Pink Floyd

I don't really care if a band is full of virtuosos when making their music, I just care if it sounds good. That being said Pink Floyd make some great thematically cohesive albums that never fail to inspire emotion in me.

I personally love Pink Floyd... and i think Dream theater are alright.

but i voted for Pink Floyd becasue there lyircs and the way each album sounds and just hits me and i dunno it just gets me thinkign i get in this comfortable zone sometimes get's me in a uncomfortable zone into a place where unless listening to music like Floyds i wouldn't other wise think about which is a good thing...

and with Dream Theater i don't get that same feeling..

both bands are amazing, and have different sounds... but theres just something more about Pink Floyd..

Pink Floyd all the way. They were and still are more original than Dream Theater and they have cooler songs. And I can enjoy the singing and lyrics.

I dont even know Dream Theater.
Pink Floyd.

DONT KNOW DREAM THEATER!!! WOW!!! They are really talented i love them but im still gonna have to say Floyd they....just got music "Right"

Pink Floyd hands down, I dont even consider dream theater to be a good band. Lyrics are amazing, musically compelling (like a ton of other people have said), basically just for all the other reasons already listed. I'll say why I don't think dream theater can hold a candle to pink floyd. They've got amazing technical ability, i'll give them that. Aside from that, I don't think they've got anything going for them. There's only so many times you can listen to them wailing on their instruments before it all starts to sound like the same stuff over and over again. They need to bring something else to the table before I'd consider them a good band.

I agree, i dont find Dream Theater all that progressive, i think Radiohead and The Mars Volta are way more progressive than Dream Theater...Of course this is something me and many other prog fans dont see eye to eye with.

Of all the progressive metal bands, i would say DT are the worst, they are certainly the least original, however they were the first band of this genre to get a good deal of popularity, but it pisses me off when DT fanboys confuse popularizing a genre with being innovative and original, because nearly every other prog metal band has more to offer than DT imo...Bands like Tool have originality on their side, because they dont have to rely on nothing but stealing ideas from old prog bands to be considered "prog"...This is not so for Dream Theater...Symphony X and Opeth are better recomended.

Pink Floyd by far, in fact the guy who made this comparison should be shot.

Yeah dude.......very well said...Symphony X is much much better than Dream Theater

I like Dream Theater, and I like Pink Floyd, but I can't decide who I prefer because they are completely different genres.

It's like saying In Flames Vs. Deep Purple.

So yah. That was pointless.

:rofl:

Annnnnd the Prog Dr has made his diagnosis.

Not a big fan of either of those bands. :(

Don't be stupid. The genre is called Rock. And the styles are both progressive, and I thought the comparison was an interesting one. Although I'm a bit surprised by the landslide

No wonder you don't find DT all that progressive, you think Radiohead and The Mars Volta are progressive. Sorry to tell you but you seem to have prog rock mixed up with experimental rock. Radiohead and The Mars Volta are experimental rock and not the least bit progressive - according to me and every other music critic I have ever corresponded with.


Funny you say that, because I find them to be the best progressive metal band. And are you saying you've heard every single signed prog metal band in the world?
I don't know how you could say they're not original if you've heard songs like "The Great Debate" or "Misunderstood," for example.


Just about every single Tool song creates the exact same moods by employing uninteresting styles and phrases. There is nothing original about Tool. Their use of boring chord progressions and mediocre melodies are far from original. And I've previously spoken about their so called "original lyrics."

You talk about how DT steal ideas from old prog bands, but did the obvious ever occur to you? That every single modern band (and every musician while we're here) has "stolen" something from other bands (or music). DT have found a way to compose music which has been obviously influenced by many of their favourite bands but at the same time made it their own by never repeating their sound. DT don't even have a trademark sound because each of their albums are so distinct. And as for Symphony X, you do know that their V album (music and concept) was admittedly to be pretty much stolen directly from DT's Scenes From a Memory, don't you?

I know someone else who needs to not only be shot (for thinking The Mars Volta are progressive) but injected with a slow acting virus causing irrefutable pain.

I envy you. Please go run and buy Scenes From a Memory. Oh and by the way I hope you didn't vote 'cause that would have been naughty of you.

Progressive Rock IS Experiemental Rock, dumbass.

What Critics?...Your elitist buddys?



No i havent heard them all.

But i have heard a good deal of progressive metal, and theres certainly more original bands out there, you obviously havent heard these bands if you think DT even compares, stop lying to yourself...DT are NOT original, i have listened to enough 70s prog to know where DT get their ideas from.


Oh yeah, you call Tool unoriginal, uninteresting, boring and pretentious and yet YOU LIKE DREAM THEATER???

I sense a little fanboism, im sure i am not alone on this.

If Tool are so unoriginal, you should at least name me one band who sounded like Tool before Tool.

True, but DT dont just steal, they copy, hell, there were times when i got them confused with Styx and Saga...And their instrumentals are often taken from the books of Rush and ELP, if you ever listened to these bands, you would realise that DT are merely copying their style, and they are incapable of improving upon the old styles they so love to beat to death.

You have the whole concept of progressive rock wrong, its about being PROGRESSIVE, ripping off old progressive bands dosent make YOU progressive, its about doing something different, which is what seperates Radiohead and Mars Volta from Dream Theater. This was the whole prog philosophy in the 70s, most progressive bands from that era stood out from each other, they didnt try to imitate each other, they did their own thing instead...Thats what being progressive is all about.

Also V is probably Symphony X's worst album, way to go on that one.

Among Mars Voltas biggest influences are Yes, Pink Floyd, Rush and King Crimson...How in the hell are they not prog?...They have most of the progressive elements (check the prog education thread) that i have already named and yet they are still pretty original.

I dont mean to boast, but i know more about progressive rock than you, WHY?...Because im Dr. Prog dammit.

Incorrect. Do some research please, because I ain't explaining it. They are completely different styles.

Yes, okay then.

Mate, music is my living, so unless it's yours, I doubt you've heard more prog metal than me

I never said there wasn't.

Only one? Okay: Katatonia.

Yes, I already said DT cite their influences, what's wrong with that? And "YTSE Jam" is the only instrumental taken from Rush or ELP. It was meant to be a tribute to Rush's "YYZ."

I'm sorry, but they aren't prog, no matter what you think or believe.

I didn't realise you were so egotistical. Actually, the majority of Symphony X fans (from what I've gathered so far) feel that V is their greatest album.

I really doubt that...Judging by the whole experimental rock = prog rock thing.

Katatonia?...I heard them, nice try...And most Symphony X fans consider DWOT the best.

Experiemental rock for one thing, is only a term, theres no real experiemental rock genre, style or movement, its only used to discribe unconventional styles of rock, mainly Avant Garde and Progressive Rock....And sometimes Alternative Rock.

Radiohead and Mars Volta have a good amount of prog elements...Odd time signatures and scales, lengthy compositions, unconventional arangements, obscure lyrics, consistant themes and concepts, innovative instrumentation, unusual vocals, songs that dont conform to verse-chorus-verse structures...And thats barely scratching the surface...Sure the masse's may say otherwise, but then again these are the same guys who think Sum41 are punk rock, dont always go by what the critics and elitists tell you

And if you want to make a valid arguement, you will have to do better than "you're wrong", "incorrect", "nope" and "yeah right".

First, there's no argument because I already said I've yet to meet a musician who consider Mars Volta or Radiohead to be progessive. So you can't argue that fact.

So I did say "Incorrect" but I don't believe I said the others.

What do you mean by nice try with Katatonia? And where did you get your information from, regarding TDWoT being the fan's favoured album?

Experimental rock is a style. Look it up.

Well gee, you know musicians, that must make you special. :rolleyes:

Im a musician, how about you?

I know musicians too, who would back me on this arguement, its about the people you know.

You are not even trying to back up your opinions with valid reasoning...And FYI mentioning other peoples subjective opinions isnt a credible way to win a arguement.

You are going by the opinions of others, im going by my own, and because im very positive that i have heard more progressive rock bands than you ever will, it gives my opinions at least some validation.

You don't have to make this personal. So is music your profession? Do you get paid for writing endless articles about endless amounts of bands? Because I do, so maybe my "opinion" has some validity as well. But there is no opinion as far as I'm concerned, because Mars Volta aren't considered to be prog, it's just fact. If you think they are then okay, but it doesn't change this fact. What dampens the validity of your opinions is the amount of spelling and grammatical errors you make.
I just estimated the amount of prog rock I have on my computer and it's about 40 gbs. And that's only the prog bands I enjoy, so it doesn't include the **** load of cds I have.

Yes, I know. That's because it's just something I believe to be fact. And I guess I don't need to explain something that I believe to be fact. I believe you're wrong, so I don't care for explaining why this is the case. Had it been something more subjective in nature, I would be happy to properly argue with you, believe me.

Yes. My instruments are Piano, Trumpet, Saxophone, Guitar, Drums. All up about 15 years. Actually I've been playing the piano for 21 years.

:rofl:

I dont believe you, on anything you just said....If you can prove me wrong, all i need is some of your music clips, or links to whatever you do articles for.

My opinion isnt valid because of my grammar?...That would be true if we were actualy having a debate about grammar, but we are not...So, does this mean spelling Kurt Cobain as "Kurt Kobain" takes away some of your credibility points?

Most people on this forum probably do have large CD collections, i know i do, im probably the only person to own boxsets from both Nirvana and Hank Williams...So dont boast about it like it makes you different.

And what facts??...THERE IS NO FACT THAT STATES THAT MARS VOLTA ARENT PROG, in fact, most prog sites list them as a prog band, observe.

http://www.progarchives.com/Progress...T.asp?letter=m

This happens to be the most popular prog site there is, with a very active forum, of which i am a member...Sure you will say they dont count for no reason whatsoever, so eat your heart out...There are many people who DO think Mars Volta are prog, and you are only counting the opinions of people who share your views, which is only a small portion of a much larger demographic...Shows how open minded you are.

Actually I said dampen your validity. And the example you gave was one of spelling error. You said "a argument" earlier. And this dampens the validity of your opinions because it makes you look like you're about 10 years old.


Yes I'm obviously aware of that site and that many people call them prog. I'm saying it's fact that I regard them as not being prog. You don't have to insult me. And I would be willing to show you some of my articles. I write for various magazines and for allmusic.com. But you're being too childish and make far too many generalisations in your writing. I won't respond to you any further. It's just music, please settle down. You're winning on this poll, so I guess you win this 'argument' then.

Oh, its a fact because its your opinion?...How vain of you.

I always believed that most music critics are self important, ego minded and condescending *******s who think their opinions are so superior to everyone else's, you make me believe this even more.

You are a hypocrite, how do you excuse not spelling Kurt Cobain right?...Not exactly a tongue twister you know.

Im 19 going on 20 in two months, my grammar isnt incoherent, its not like im writing like this....

"Your wrng, you r beaing a doochebagg"

How about those music clips?...Or those links to some of your brillant articles.

pink floyd

I got halfway through this argument and have to side with boo boo on this. I'd consider Radiohead and the Mars Volta far more progressive than say Dream Theater. While Dream Theater might fall into the genre of Progressive by going be the loose definition of Progressive Rock/Metal as having long compositions, lyrics that point to more conceptual ideas, unusual time signatures and all that (although the very same could be said of TMV), Radiohead experiment with new sounds and styles actually trying to make progress in popular music. I find it ironic how a lot of progressive rock is supposedly making progress by ripping off older bands and injecting nothing new.

You think that Dream Theater inject nothing new?
Metropolis Part 2, and in fact all DT's music, is very original in my opinion.

No they don't inject anything. Except some form of tranquiliser.

And it's absolute ignorance to neglect the Mars Volta or Radiohead as being in the least bit progressive. As ShootingStar said, varying time signatures, unorthodox composition and experimental sounds. Prog music is what it says it is. Progressive. Those two bands are constantly evolving their sound and style. It is ignorance to deny that the Mars Volta or Radiohead do not in anyway resemble the progressive style. Because they do. And they do it particularly better then Dream Theater. Dream Theaters sound has barely changed from day 1.

It must be a very neglected 40gb of prog on your computer Don, if Dream Theater come out on top.

Thats not the way it was in the 70s, the concept of being progressive rock was being completely original and sounding like non other band, and very rarely did prog bands sound like other prog bands...King Crimson, Yes, Pink Floyd, Genesis, Jethro Tull, ELP, Van Der Graaf Generator and Gentle Giant were all at opposing ends of the sonic spectrum, but they all shared a common unitity, which was taking rock music to a new level...They all shared similar characteristics but each one had their own unique sound, thats one thing about prog in the 70s that has always intrigued me, that every band was not too similar, not too different...Its one thing that has always made the genre both distintive and diverse.

I think what you are refering to are these bands who admire classic prog so much that instead of taking a new direction they just try to copy and rebuild the old sound, and they were more concerned with authenticity than with innovation or originality...In the 80s bands like Marillion, Arena and IQ reached a great deal of popularity for how they captured the "classic" prog sound, this became the Neo prog movement (probably my least favorite sub-genre to prog)...Next to these bands there was nothing else, prog was dead in the 80s pretty much, but it regained popularity in the 90s, and bands began making more original progressive rock music, such as Primus, Tool, Radiohead and Sigur Ros...Yet for some reason some music purists dont consider them prog because of their lack of similarity with other prog bands, too progressive to be progressive, lol.

This is my problem with Don and other so called "progressive fans"...They say they love progressive rock, but they refuse to acknowledge any of the most progressive modern bands as being progressive rock because they arent doing what has been done before, which makes no sense, thats what progressive rock is all about, doing what hasnt been done before, yet people like Don wont acknowledge TMV or Radiohead as prog dispite their innovations, and yet they embrace Dream Theater as prog dispite havent innovating anything, instead they do what has been done before, and that to me is NOT true progressive rock.

This kind of debate is what devides fans of prog, between the purists who think all prog bands should remain the same, and the more open minded fans who embrace the idea that progressive rock bands should continue being, well, progressive.

I consider myself part of the latter group, i consider myself a true prog fan, because i think progressive bands should continue to try different things, its idiotic that all these so called prog fans want to keep the genre in a time capsule...Progressive rock should always be progressive, or else its just a very big oxymoron.

Put it this way, i love King Crimson and i love Yes, but as long as we still have their music to listen to, we dont really need another King Crimson band or another Yes band.

Thanks for calling me stupid for having an opinion. That certainly doesn't make you ignorant...

That's ok Boo Boo, I can accept your opinion! :)

:love:

I think its a tad stupid to get so anal about progressive rock like this..I mean its progressive rock for fecks sake..