:laughing:

Oh the stupid arguments I've had with DT fanboys who would say things like "Well they're better than Nirvana, at least they're not repetitive".

Repetition can be a good or bad thing depending on how you use it.

Contrary to popular belief, prog bands knew the value of repetition, KC used repetition A LOT, Larks and Red for example.

And that's Dream Theater's biggest problem, they have ADHD or something, they can't stick to any kind of pattern.

I am going to thank God everyday that I don't have a music outlook like you.

First of all, if you don't think they are prog than I think that disqualifies you from all discussion. They have delved into every facet of progressive rock and if you listen to Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence, Scenes from a Memory, or Octavarium, and you find these guys don't play prog then you are deaf.

And yes, repetition is bad. Artists should explore, and produce new things. I think one of the things that appeals to me about DT is that their only goal is to push the limits and play something that sounds good.

I think that if any well known pop artists had their talent, and knowledge of theory, they would take their musical outlook. Jimmy page simply doesn't know how to do some of the things that Petrucci can. I am not saying that DT is better than Zep, I am simply saying that where Page's talent ends, Petrucci has the ability to explore and extract more out of the guitar.

So do you think The Spirit Carries On doesn't have soul? Or how about Petrucci's solo at the end of Octavarium. Or what about Rite of Passage?

And vice versa.

Well I haven't heard their entire discography but that won't change as long as I have some dignity.

I've heard stuff from most of their studio albums and no matter what era it was, it always sounds the same. Stuff they do now doesn't sound very different from what they did in 1988, except for slightly adapting to whatever the big metal trend is at the moment.

They're a very niche band that doesn't break from a formula.

They are a prog band no doubt, because the definitions of prog have changed sad to say, while it was originally used to describe all these groups that were breaking serious artistic ground in the 60s and 70s, with the 80s and onwards it's been used to define bands who are simply influenced by that movement, but many of them don't take the kinda artistic risks that the original prog bands took.

And that's why Radiohead are not prog, yet Dream Theater are, because the term has been twisted around from it's original meaning.

That being said, they're not a progressive band at all.

Hehehehehehehehehehehe

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Whew. Oh man, sorry about that.

While it's true that Petrucci can do things Page can't.

Page could also do things that Petrucci can't, like crafting great songs, or riffs that I won't end up forgetting in 5 minutes.

Anyway. This has been fun, so I'll let this go on for another page or two. But afterwards I expect you to cut this crap out if you want to stick around. Because I'm starting to believe you're just trolling.

Love your work Boo Boo, not a bad list and your Pettruci comments are pretty spot on.

Looks like trolling to me. You like who you like, and that's really cute, and while we encourage a healthy debate here flaming people in order to defend your views isn't cool. One more insult and you're gone for a week.

Despite being a big DT fan myself, I totally agree with the above statement in that Radiohead are seen as Art Rock as opposed to Prog and lets face it, listening to Radiohead is really what prog Rock should all be about as Radiohead are extremely progressive and constantly seek to evolve.

Whereas DT, are very much a combination of some of my favourite prog/rock bands of the 70's and 80's. 50% of their music sounds like Kansas in their prog era and the other 50% a combination of Rush with elements of Toto, all this mixed in with a metal feel supposedly equals Progressive Metal. In fact the metal aspect to their music is probably the only really progressive thing in their music but then again they are not an metal group, so the progressive metal label could be seen as being totally inaccurate.

A total of 16 posts. 16 posts sucking Dream Theaters ****?

I think this is what you were looking for - DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site

Don't you dare bring Rush into this Dream Theater conversation!!!

Oh yeah? I'll bring up Rush in this Dream Theater conversation. Rush > Dream Theater.

If you think DT sounds the same now as they did when the started out you are completely wrong. See you simply don't know the band. You look at Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence and then listen to Train of Thought, then listen to Octavarium. They are as far different as possible.

As different as possible? So did they start with like a reggae-funk sort of sound and then move on to prog-metal?

No, they were a little less heavy back when they started, but they're basically the same.

No thats not true at all. You think A Change of Seasons is basically the same thing as Train of Thought? you are nuts

Speaking of art rock, there really wasn't much distinguishing the two terms back in the 70s. It was used to describe Genesis just as often as it was used to describe Roxy Music.

If OK Computer and Kid A were released in the 70s they would undeniably be considered prog albums.

But now of course prog is a term used to describe bands that take obvious influence from other prog bands. So it's very common to see a bunch of tards saying "Radiohead are not prog, I can't hear any Yes or Genesis influences at all".

That's a pretty good description, though I love Rush, they're an obvious inlfluence on Dream Theater. But overall DT do remind me more of Kansas and Toto with a metal twist. :laughing:

I don't consider Toto to be much of a prog band actually. In the late 70s you had arena rock bands like Journey and Toto embracing some prog influences but when these bands get lumped into the same category it's quite embarassing.

I think of bands like Kansas and Styx as being lite prog or commercial prog, a combination of prog and arena rock. And yes, DT reminds me a lot more of Kansas and Styx than they do King Crimson and Yes. And the saddest part is...

Kansas and Styx are still way better.

Heh if anything progressive metal is more metal than it is prog. At least in my opinion.

Agreed, I can remember back in the early 80`s when prog was supposedly dead but Marillion were a huge band in the UK and were labelled neo prog rock and had hordes of adoring fans. In reality, listening to Marillion was just like listening to Peter Gabriel era Genesis and there was absolutely nothing original or new about them, but the fact that they sounded like Genesis deemed them the new prog rock masters label of the 80's. In fact the most progressive artist at that time in the UK was certainly Kate Bush but she was labelled "Art Rock".

It now becomes clear, how a band like Radiohead have achieved the "Art Rock" label and not prog............Quite simply they don`t sound like anybody before them.

Being from the UK I was always more fascinated by US bands than UK ones especially in the late 70`s and 80`s and here you have named 4 favs Toto and Journey (Soft-Hard Rock) Styx and Kansas (Prog/Rock)

I think the defining feature in prog rock especially of that era, is that the British animal is very different to the north American one and Rush certainly followed the British animal, whereas Kansas and Styx are good evidence of the Amercian animal. Therefore, its no surprise that DT are far more like either Kansas and Toto than they are like either KC or Yes.

In fact, the only prog type stuff Journey ever did was in their Greg Rolie era and as for Toto their second album "Hydra" had some elements but that is as about as far as it goes.

Whereas the 3 Kansas albums "Masque" "Left Overture" and "Point of no Return" along with the 2 Styx albums "the Grand Illusion" and "Pieces of Eight" for me are 5 of the greatest prog albums ever released.

DT in some aspects, are actually more set up like a rock band than a true prog group. They are set up in the way that both Toto or Journey were, for example, they have a dominant lead singer with a great voice in LaBrie very similiar to either Kimball and Perry in quality (even though I think Kimball and Perry have the edge) Showman guitarist in Petrucci similiar to either Lukather and Schon and a consumate sticksman in Portnoy again similiar to J.Pocaro or Smith and like these groups designed for arena rock, they then added on the progressive metal influences.

Here's my top ten

10. Bo Diddley
9. Brian May
8. Chuck Berry
7. Frank Zappa
6. David Gilmour
5. Carlos Santana
4. Jerry Garcia
3. Jimmy Page
2. Stevie Ray Vaughan
1. Jimi Hendrix

Tuneman,

I`m sure this has been mentioned on this thread before but short of shifting through a lot of threads here, tell me your opinion on the folllowing guitarists and how you think they compare to Petrucci?

Jimi Hendrix, Jimmy Page and Ritchie Blackmore for me probably the three greatest in ability, showmanship and influence? When I talk about ability I`m not talking about technical ability but more about their ability to make me froth at the mouth.

I`ve got stuff by both of these artists and to be honest couldn`t even name you a song by either or even remember a guitar riff, it shows how memorable they are.

By that definition, after I really learned the guitar, and listened to a lot of different types of music, I realized that Hendrix and Jimmy were very limited in that definition of ability. Both are kinda sloppy players live, and Page rarely wanders out of the minor pentatonic scale for his solos.

Watch these and tell me how this man has no soul, emotion or whatever the hell you nitwits want to call it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H78F7M-LATw
YouTube - Octavarium - solo end

As a non-guitar player or indeed a non-musician in any way shape or form "Minor Pentatonic Scale" means jack **** to me.

The link that you have provided with the wobbly camera is not the way to impress someone.

I like John Petrucci as a guitarist but to say that both Hendrix and Page are of limited ability and sloppy players live, infers that you see them as inferior guitar players.

Watching either Hendrix, Page or Blackmore etc play the guitar, is I imagine for most people, the reason why they want to learn the instrument in the first place and form a band, along with a huge desire to listen to their music as often as possible.

So what? There's nothing seriously limited about the pentatonic scale, it's the most commonly used scale in music from all around the world. It's the foundation of blues and rock music, and a lot of folk music, and since that's what Page's music is derived from, rather than being derived from neo classical music like Petrucci is, of course he prefers the pentatonic scale.

Saying a guitarist is better based on what kind of scales he uses is just ridiculous. It's all about how you play, not what you play.

I'm no muso, but I don't think I have to be to know that you don't know as much about music theory as you want us to believe.

do you log in just to post in this thread?

No, he posts elsewhere. That would be Tuneman who only trolls this thread.

yea, sorry, quoted the wrong person

Im no theory buff, but I know enough that you can only do so much with the same 5 notes. Being able to play in different scales means that you have the ABILITY to invoke more expressions with your music.

I want you to tell me that after you see these vids, if you still think he is a robot.

I confess, that last one is actually really damn good, if Petrucci did more of that, I would like him a lot more, rest assured.

Look, I'm not one of these people ranting about how he likes emotion, I don't even like that term, "emotion", it's a very subjective term. I mean what counts as emotional guitar playing? Just playing the guitar slow and tastefull? You don't have to be "emotional" to do that.

I'm not accusing Petrucci of lacking emotion, I accuse him of lacking taste, restraint and creativity.

And because of that his music doesn't have the kinda emotional impact on me that other guitarists have, he lacks the taste of guys like Gilmour, Santana and Harrison, and the energy of guys like Hendrix, Page and Townsend.

Even when Petrucci takes it slow, it's not anything Steve Hackett, Jan Akkerman or Andy Latimer couldn't do better, they're just as skilled as Petrucci if not more, but a lot more creative, original and tasteful at the same time.

I don't really agree with your list my top 10 would be.
Jimi Hendrix
Zakk Wylde
Randy Rhodes
Eddie Vanhalen
Gary Moore
Jake lee
Dimebag
Tony Iommi
Angus Young
Malcolm Young

Metal isn't the only rock genre in existance ya know.

Yeah I do have Garry moore Angus Malcolm and Jimi Hendrix they are counted more as hard rock as far as I can tell but I just personally like metal more than soft rock.

Don`t you mean hard rock?

Hey, I don't wanna come off saying that you are stupid, Hackett is a hell of a guitarist. But to think petrucci is a robot, or IMO putting him in anything below ten is a travesty. But that second part is subjective!

Here's my top ten rock guitarists:

John Petrucci
Eddie Van Halen
Stevie Ray Vaughan
Gilmour
Vai
Slash
Kirk Hammett
Eric Johnson
Satriani
Randy Rhoads

once again, do you log in just to post in this thread, Tuneman1?

Something I found while surfing YouTube, couldn't help but compare. Notice the X-factor? Petrucci's version sounds like a midi file.

that's because one person is reciting a series of notes and the other is playing his music.

WTF is the last minute of that first clip?

what really stands out the most to me is tone. the human soul is not a sterile thing, why should the sound of 'your' instrument be as such? it's the one thing that has always consistently bothered me the most about virtuoso shredder types.

Another thing is originality.

I can pretty much tell when it's Gilmour, despite the imitators, but I'm never gonna say "hey this sounds like a Petrucci solo" unless someone tells me, because of his complete lack of a trademark sound.

...it's pretty thorough...though wayne kramer should be partnered with fred "sonic" smith...and add steve albini maybe....and leigh stephens of blue cheer if he's not already on there.

A midi file? What are you talking about it sounded absolutely nothing like a midi file.... do you mean in tempo and clean?