saw Dream Theater saturday night

Jim Garten wrote: 2 - send LaBrie to vocal school

He's a fairly good singer, but often he sings too much in the high registers. "Awake" is the album where he does that in a very extreme way, and sadly - while it may work in the studio with many takes and lots of tweaking - he simply fails to reproduce that on stage. So my best advice to him (and those who write his melody lines): less (lower) is more (better)!

No -- hopefully I was (sometimes) that before I came here. Some sure seem to think so -- see The Velvet Room.... Again, I'm NOT really a DT hater -- they're just a favourite "target" of mine, as so many seem to take them so seriously. I actually kind of LIKED the first song I heard by them ("As I Am.") Re the "DT bitterness," I think DT are simply the most successful and visible example of a musical form than many old-time prog fans (like myself) just do not consider to be "prog." They do come in for a lot of flak, admittedly, but then prog metal in general does too. That may be regrettable and divisive, but perhaps we ultimately need two separate (but linked) forums (metal and classic/classic inspired prog) here. Modern metal (and a vocal cynical, less-than-articulate or sensitive minority of its younger fans) tend to irritate me -- but much less than rap does!   Sorry if my (attempted) humour and teasing offended you, or others! (I do that, from time to time -- offend and apologize....)   Peace -- as someone since departed used to say!

I hear ya Pete.  I wasn't meaning to spar with you.  Everyone has their opinions and passions for thier favorite artists.  One funny thing, I have always described DT to folks as Prog Hard Rock,  I hate the whole labeling thing, but I can see some folks perceiving them as Prog metal.  I guess it's all pesonal perception regardless how "WE" lable them. I am curious though why you don't consider them progressive, because by my definition, they are more Progressive than quite a few MAJOR bands labled here.  Again...personal perception and I'm not looking to piss anyone off talking bad about thier premier artists.

Jim, I hear what your saying about the Floyd covers.  I know many folks scratch thier head over the cover/tribute thing.  I was lucky enough to see them in LA 2 weeks ago when they covered Sheep in it's entirety, it was astounding!!  I really believe with DT, they are attempting to pay hommage to the greats past, and not just throwing tunes out there.

Mike and Jim I agree with quite a bit you have to say regarding James Labrie.  Quite frankly he has always been my least favorite of the ensemble.  He is, of all the musicians in the band, the most "metal" to me.  Although in the past 5-6 years he has caused me to re-evaluate my opinion.  Taking pride in his craft is one thing,as Sleeper pointed out, but comparitively to other vocalists at his age and point in his career he's a step above.  How many of our 70's and 80's favorites have gotten better with age vocally?  It is definatly an oddity.  Have to give him credit for that, regardless if he seems lacking comparatively to the rest of the band.

sideways wrote: Peter wrote: Again, I'm NOT really a DT hater -- they're just a favourite "target" of mine, as so many seem to take them so seriously. I actually kind of LIKED the first song I heard by them ("As I Am.") Re the "DT bitterness," I think DT are simply the most successful and visible example of a musical form than many old-time prog fans (like myself) just do not consider to be "prog." They do come in for a lot of flak, admittedly, but then prog metal in general does too. I hear ya Pete.  I wasn't meaning to spar with you.  Everyone has their opinions and passions for thier favorite artists.  One funny thing, I have always described DT to folks as Prog Hard Rock,  I hate the whole labeling thing, but I can see some folks perceiving them as Prog metal.  I guess it's all pesonal perception regardless how "WE" lable them. I am curious though why you don't consider them progressive, because by my definition, they are more Progressive than quite a few MAJOR bands labled here.  Again...personal perception and I'm not looking to piss anyone off talking bad about thier premier artists.

It's not that I don't consider DT (small p) "progressive," Sideways, but that I don't consider DT and metal as (capitals P & R) "Progressive Rock."

That term, for me, indicates a sound, spirit and an era typified by the classic "founding fathers" of prog: early-mid 70s Genesis, Yes, ELP, Gentle Giant, etc.

Many, especially the younger/non-native English speaking set, seem to adhere closer to a dictionary interpretation of the word to indicate artists who are somehow "progressing" in their sound, or doing something notably "different" from the bulk of their peers. For an artist to be "progressive," for them, they need not sound anything at all like the classic prog bands -- see Radiohead, metal, etc.

As I've suggested many times here, I really think the term "progressive," as a means to categorize music, has outlived its usefulness. Always vague in meaning, it is now made to retroactively refer to older bands which were not generally regarded as "progressive rock" (or "prog") "back then," rock that imitates classic prog ("neo prog" -- IQ, etc), but fails to progress, and a host of other forms (metal with keyboards, folk with electric instruments, world music, etc) that bear very little in common with classic prog, or even each other. I do not like the term (because it is outdated and vague/subjective), but still use it -- for want of a better) to refer to that 'weird"/"difficult"/"complicated" 70s stuff, and the new, derivitive music that hearkens back to that sound.

As I've posited elsewhere, it means something subtly -- or even radically -- different for each of us, and therein lies the problem, and the reason why a 45 year old Genesis fan is dismayed to find himself sharing "his" site with an increasing number of fifteen year old "death" metal fans. Yes, there can be (and often is) common ground and "cross-fertilization" in ideas and attitudes (musical & otherwise), but also, in my experience, there is too often rancour, resentment and fundamentally different outlooks & modes of communication along generational & musical lines. (That said, I genuinely believe the two major fan bases have come a long way in their short time together here in building mutual respect and/or appreciation for each other, and their respective preferred musics. The "gap" in perceived or actual differences seems to be narrowing, and while I personally am very unlikely to ever become a fan of music that irritates and alienates me (or -- shudder -- death growls), that coming together can only be good on many levels, in the long run.

Still, I don't like the "P" word. Always rather amorphous, it is now being made to describe too many dissimilar things, and is simply inadequate for the purpose it is being forced to serve here. (As with perhaps most artists, I don't like the categorization/rationalization/quantification/qualification of art in general. Art is not math, science or sport, and our mere words do not contain it, or capture its essence. It is a spiritual/instinctive/individual thing -- not a "measurable" intellectual thing.

There -- my long-considered (& oft-repeated) sincere response!

Peter wrote: (My use of this: indicates a joke, of course -- a post not to be taken to heart.)

Well that's a relief! I thought you were flirting with all of us!

Peter wrote: I'm often silly/irreverent (the Stynx fans have yet to come for my head, or the Pallas fans Mr. Garten's), but hell, I live thousands of miles from my "real" friends, and have to amuse myself in some fashion....

Yeah... Jim really shows the Pallas fans that he loves their debut album.