Dream Theater

Let's see ... their best albums have average ratings of 4.42, 4.36 and 4.35. I fail to see why that should mean they're overrated.

By the way: How can anything be OVERRATED? Let the people decide ... and they have decided. I don't think that the 5 star reviews by fanboys cause an album to be overrated either, because you quickly get an equal amount of 1 star reviews by people who want to rectify the rating. In fact, this even causes the album to be underrated ((1 + 5) / 2 = 3. If the fanboy had rated it 4 stars, that might not have caused the "countervote").

I think that the current ranking algorithm properly addresses the problems ... Train Of Thought was overrated (top ten), and is now IMO properly rated (not even in the top 100 anymore).

Octavarium is currently at position 29, and it is likely to drop further (because I think that I agree with the public opinion that it is a 4 star album, and the average rating should settle somewhere around 3.9-4.0).

I've voted for correct reputation, although I'm not sure what it really means.

I'm sure that they are overated by some, but if one really loves something thats how it is.
I remember in my youth ( when I was a puppy!) my love of ELP was the same!

Also I am sure people undreate them too, i'll shut up now.

No wait, I agree with what Mike says also!

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Philrod wrote: Just wanted to know the overall feel on this site. I personally think they are overrated, even though I like them, but I can't stand James Labrie . Petrucci Myung and Portnoy are a great three IMO. Rudess is ok. Whether you like LaBrie or not shouldn't affect your rating. If you think that he's a bad singer, it should affect the rating ... but he is not. His technique, range and phrasing are excellent, it's just a matter of personal taste if you like his voice or not. I think that the ability to separate personal taste and objective analysis of the music is vital to writing good reviews. I try myself, but it isn't always easy.

Thats exactky why I dont review dream theater, because I cant be objective! Labrie just pisses me off, because for me he ruins the experience. He has great skills, but tries too much to be emotional... But anyways this is why I don't review dream theater... even if I adore the rythm section, especially Mike Portnoy... as a bassist myself it's pretty easy to see that Myung can forget what the bass is all about. As Dave Mustaine puts it from  some guitarists he heard: Their skills are pretty amazing, but they desperately need ''rock class 101''!

Correct reputation.

"Overrated" is a term people use when a band they dislike is getting more attention than their favourite band. "Underrated" is what they call their band.

OK they are a great group with magnificent songs but i can´t stand it when all their albums are considered as prog clasics.

Why some guys can´t stand the fact that some albums are simply good (falling into infinity, six degrees) or even uninspired (train of thought(a great metal album but far from progressive)).

No band can have only highlights anyway.

enjoy

Coya wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: Philrod wrote: Just wanted to know the overall feel on this site. I personally think they are overrated, even though I like them, but I can't stand James Labrie . Petrucci Myung and Portnoy are a great three IMO. Rudess is ok. Whether you like LaBrie or not shouldn't affect your rating. If you think that he's a bad singer, it should affect the rating ... but he is not. His technique, range and phrasing are excellent, it's just a matter of personal taste if you like his voice or not. I think that the ability to separate personal taste and objective analysis of the music is vital to writing good reviews. I try myself, but it isn't always easy. Even though objectivity is very important, subjectivity is the escence of any opinion, and a review a very opinion-like analysis. Of course that one should point the musician's talent, but if you don't like it, it's over, you cannot give him a good qualification because it does not fullfill you completely; and that is exactly what subjectivity determines. Don't missunderstand me, objectivity is VERY important and necesary, but you cannot (and IMO should not) try to leave subjectivity, it's what makes a review (or an opinion) YOURS.

You have a point there ... but the importance of subjectivity IMO depends on what you are reviewing:

If you review Opeth vocals, your verdict will be entirely subjective. I could also be wrong about this, but there is really no point of reference that you could use to objectively rate Mikael's growls.

If you review LaBrie's vocals, you have many objective criteria for that type of singing - phrasing, range, tremolo/vibrato, breathing ... and he does all that very well. I guess that even if you really don't like his VOICE, you still have to admit that he's a good singer. His TECHNIQUE is flawless.

So while you are free to rate Opeth vocals anywhere from 1 to 5 stars, IMO LaBrie can only be rated in the range of 3 to 5 stars, IF the reviewer want's to be taken seriously. It's either 3 stars (good singer, but I hate his voice), 4 stars (good singer, but not my favorite) or 5 stars (brilliant singer, my all time favorite).

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Coya wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: Philrod wrote: Just wanted to know the overall feel on this site. I personally think they are overrated, even though I like them, but I can't stand James Labrie . Petrucci Myung and Portnoy are a great three IMO. Rudess is ok. Whether you like LaBrie or not shouldn't affect your rating. If you think that he's a bad singer, it should affect the rating ... but he is not. His technique, range and phrasing are excellent, it's just a matter of personal taste if you like his voice or not. I think that the ability to separate personal taste and objective analysis of the music is vital to writing good reviews. I try myself, but it isn't always easy. Even though objectivity is very important, subjectivity is the escence of any opinion, and a review a very opinion-like analysis. Of course that one should point the musician's talent, but if you don't like it, it's over, you cannot give him a good qualification because it does not fullfill you completely; and that is exactly what subjectivity determines. Don't missunderstand me, objectivity is VERY important and necesary, but you cannot (and IMO should not) try to leave subjectivity, it's what makes a review (or an opinion) YOURS. You have a point there ... but the importance of subjectivity IMO depends on what you are reviewing: If you review Opeth vocals, your verdict will be entirely subjective. I could also be wrong about this, but there is really no point of reference that you could use to objectively rate Mikael's growls. If you review LaBrie's vocals, you have many objective criteria for that type of singing - phrasing, range, tremolo/vibrato, breathing ... and he does all that very well. I guess that even if you really don't like his VOICE, you still have to admit that he's a good singer. His TECHNIQUE is flawless. So while you are free to rate Opeth vocals anywhere from 1 to 5 stars, IMO LaBrie can only be rated in the range of 3 to 5 stars, IF the reviewer want's to be taken seriously. It's either 3 stars (good singer, but I hate his voice), 4 stars (good singer, but not my favorite) or 5 stars (brilliant singer, my all time favorite).

Absolut agreement. I like waht you posted because you make the point with "objectivity" just as i made mine with "subjectivity" (or at least I think I did). So, in my opinion, a  good combination of both criteria would be optimal. Greetings MikeEnRegalia (and everyone else too!)