Dream Theater - Prog or not?

Camel666 wrote: Bonnek wrote: It's not just the "riffs verses theme" development, there's also the use of keyboards, complex time signatures, non-verse-chorus song structures that make something Prog from a formal perspective. Most of all that theme development is essential to call something "true prog rock" and it's something that Metal will always have trouble with because of it's riff-based structure. In some cases, as with Opeth, the riffs span multiple bars and (usually 4) and have almost become progressive by themselves! As to Marillion, that's easy, just listen again to the Script For a Jester's Tear track, it has a clear thematic and scenic development. I am sorry, you still don't sound really convincing. You listen again to, I don't know, Misplaced Childhood, Clutching at straws, Brave, Marbles and you will find plenty of songs based on riffs. Most of them. You might also want to listen to South side of the sky or Long distance runaround, if Marillion are too neo-prog to be considered truly "progressive", and you tell me if there is no extensive use of riffs in these two. Lastly, you find me some diffrerences between, I don't know, XYZ or Red Barchetta and any DT song and I'll buy you a beer. What the hell, I'll buy you a slab.

Oh, did I say I would call Rush true Prog? 
A few songs aside, I don't think they are for the same reasons as I listed for DT.
Basically it's all in the name. The name Prog Metal says it already. Half Prog, half Metal. A few exception aside, Prog Metal will never be 100% Prog to me, but always be Metal with progressive elements.
And in case there's any remaining doubt about this, I generally prefer Prog Metal to true Prog.

And I never said Prog can't or doesn't have riffs. The addition of the thematic development makes something Prog, but besides that they can add whatever they want. Riffs, metal, even a dance beat for all I care.



Edited by Bonnek - February 21 2010 at 05:50

Prog or not?  Who cares?  If you like the music that's all that matters.  

Edited by Slartibartfast - February 21 2010 at 09:50

Dean wrote: What do you mean by "themed development" Karl?

First of all that I can't type. I meant to write theme development or musical progression as I've called it earlier on in this thread.
In fact what I try to say has been explained much better by Certif1ed in many of his reviews:

If I may quote from his Prog vs progressive thread.
That the music itself contains progressions, the word here being used to mean passages of music that segue into another, standing in contrast to simple constructions such as a verse/chorus based song.

Obviously there's no consensus whether that defines prog or not. But for me it's a big argument to call something "true Prog". 

It's not something that will improve or decrease my listening pleasure but well yeah, I was trying to explain why I chose option 5 here. Nothing more.



Edited by Bonnek - February 21 2010 at 10:01

Well if its yust half metal and half prog, what is prog rock then its the same thing half rock half prog, i gues there never was any real 100% prog band then,  that anyone can have doubts about em being prog, thats yust rediculus... i culd say the same thing about marillion its yust pop with some prog elements.

Zargus wrote: Well if its yust half metal and half prog, what is prog rock then its the same thing half rock half prog, i gues there never was any real 100% prog band then,  that anyone can have doubts about em being prog, thats yust rediculus... i culd say the same thing about marillion its yust pop with some prog elements.

Oh yes there is! Klaus Schulze and Tangerine Dream
No rock and all progressive!

Dream Theater has in most of their songs at least some progressive elements. The complex time signatures and time changes alone I would consider enough to qualify them as progressive. They have well developed musical themes throughout the majority of their songs that are anything but repetitive as far as repeating of musical ideas(especially compared to the majority of non-prog genres). They even have some mildly art rock and psychadelic influences at points of certain songs( misunderstood(the end of it),disappear, octavarium). I don't think any of their music doesn't have progressive elements,at the very least, except possibly some of the ballads. Even the heavy metal sounding songs do have a great deal of complexity.

Camel666 wrote: ... sterile speculations...

But that's exactly what this thread is for

DT once were 'Progressive Metal' (Images, Awake), then they became 'Prog Metal' (6DOIT, Train, bits of Systematic) but recently they have declined into mere 'Metal with Proggy overtones'.

I think it is very simple to understand this way. They were once truly 'Progressive', but then they started rehashing a sound they had created, and were genrefied into 'Prog Metal' (I like to think of 'Prog Rock/Metal' as genres and 'Progressive' as an underlying musicality). Now they are just metal.

But like Slarti said, who cares? I still think they are fantastic. Except I can't forgive them for screwing up Count of Tuscany.

Prog rock didn't have almost anything at all to do with rock. You know, when it started out, when the coin was actually termed. There were some Rock moments in the output of the defining Prog bands, but they were rare exceptions rather than the rule (Your Move by Yes, about 16 bars in Peel the Paint by Gentle Giant, some boogie rock workouts by ELP). In some of the more defining bands, like Genesis, there's practically no Rock there at all.

I don't see why people have this desperate needto b*****dize the term by diluting its original meaning and intent. Can't DT fans just be happy that they are a great Prog Metal band, probably even the greatest ever? What this urgent need to include them under an umbrella they've quite deliberately stepped outside of?

The result is things like Prog (the magazine) now writing about just plain Metal bands who seem vaguely mystified about what this Prog (the genre) thing even is, while utterly ignoring bands who have more in common with the elements of original Prog (at least on a compositional level) like The Week That Was.

It's almost funny to me, as a Prog fan for the last 30 years, that this genre, which was once so universally reviled and mocked has suddenly, for quite a large group, become an important seal of approval.

I realize I'm probably tilting at windmills and fighting a losing battle, but to me DT will never be a Prog band. Not that they haven't written a few songs that might qualify, but on the whole, they're still so clearly in the Metal camp that it really surprises me that there's even an argument about this - especially by people who claim to listen more closely to music than your regular Average Joe.

Prog is about more than surface elements like structure and arrangement. Or at least it used to be.

According to option 3 they are"technically virtuous." Does this make them chaste with taste? Mind you I'd like to hear pog metal. Meshuggah are making an instore near me soon. I wounder if I should ask them if they know?

I know this has all been talked to death but that is half the trouble. Art Rock means sophisticated rock. It leaves street music there and moves on. Because some people perceive that sophistication as " you basic rock and rollers are not good enough for us" snobbery then prog rock got a bad rep. Because of what some people thought that other people were not wanting to be when they should be. No wonder it's a mess. Misunderstood by everyone. Probably me too...

At least DT (prog metal) and PT (prog rock) actually progressed rock music that enabled an audience to feel included rather than excluded. Mind you the excluding was mainly the divide and rule approach of the media - then. Perhaps not so much now.

So yes, bless DT and PTree they have accomplished socially and musically. Good intentions get good results. Kudo kids!