easycure

you really said that they are absolute statements, but they are absolutely not since they exist in a context, whether you like it or not, this remains a fact. it is indistinguishable from May in terms of arrangement, in how he uses the guitar to color the piece, so baroque and glamorous, sonic conception, with a dynamics comparable to that of Queen. the ballads of Dream Theater, just like all their production, have various inspirations; on a compositional level, they are simply more amorphous: they have pop melodies, understood in the most trivial sense of the term: trivial songs, insipid, crowned by an arrangement that, in fact, comes to represent the true core of the piece, very elaborate and refined, not to mention useless in its various references.

mmmmm yes, you are absolutely right about this; I made a mistake in the review: it actually resembles Gilmour in the less progressive parts. As for Fripp, I’m not interested in the role: it’s obvious that Petrucci positions himself at the center of the song, that’s not an innovation by any means; it’s just that he uses exactly the "role" that the guitar has in Heavy Metal, combining the two elements doesn’t require much imagination to envision. Aside from that, he draws from Fripp in the way he conceives the riffs (not at all the Fripp of "Islands" if that's what you mean, but definitely the Fripp of "Three of a Perfect Pair," and even more emphatically the one from "Thrak," even more so than in this album, definitely in "Six Degrees.."). You are presenting as an innovation a fact that couldn’t be more taken for granted: by using metal stylistic elements, it’s obvious that the guitar sounds significantly more prominent, but this is an element of pure form: as already mentioned, the two elements are juxtaposed, there is no synthesis.

X michele: I simply do everything to express my opinions.. or would you prefer, like the great Sankjuro and Matt7, for me to shoot out statements like: "Dream Theater suck, they are crap." Period. That would be worse, right? It seems obvious to me.. it's obvious that if I wrote it, it's my interpretation, in other words, my opinion.

We clarified a long time ago that the almost-plagiarized piece is not "pigs on the wing" but "outside the wall." Sorry for the inaccuracy.

Prove to me then the prejudices and lack of in-depth knowledge about the band in question, I see no evidence of that.

But Orion, if it truly pleases you viscerally, I can admit it: perhaps I wasn't very clear, okay? What is certain from my point of view is that my lack of clarity is rather your lack of understanding. In any case, if you really want me to acknowledge it, I will do so without problems; at least it will definitively nullify the discussion (not proven at all except by single extrapolated phrases and therefore unreliable) of the supposed contradictions. With this, extracting phrases from a broader context simply distorts a discourse. You may assume they were "absolute," but being part of a more articulated discourse as already mentioned, they are not reliable to demonstrate any "theory."

hahahahaha :-D ..sorry Sanjuro, but here laughter is a must.. calling My Bloody Valentine a "living room band" is the most mismatched and imaginative definition one could read.. I could understand Loveless at a stretch, but you’ve really missed the mark on this one.. I don’t know.. maybe you didn’t hear it properly? maybe it's some latent hatred reflecting off the DT review? or maybe you just prefer stuff that’s more "violent" (but then why come here to comment)? I’d love to know how for you this album is "living room" anyway.. so I can keep having a bit of a laugh.. ;-)

To pick up the conversation from yesterday (this way I also respond to Orion), all the various different styles that Dream Theater draws from are never filtered, they are never synthesized to create a unique style, but they remain as they are, all too recognizable. In fact, for example, in the ballads, you can find a mix of Pink Floydian arrangements and baroque glam reminiscences, combined with melodies that are essentially anonymous in their being purely pop. However, these various elements never intersect; they are added together, and their sum never reaches any meaning different from its constituent parts. Similarly, in the more intricate pieces, alongside the metal dogmas (palm muting, double bass, and so on), there are those of progressive. They are simply juxtaposed. But all these elements, besides being poorly synthesized, remain at a prototypical level, as if they were the schematic abstraction of the styles they draw from, meaning they never take on a personal configuration. It’s frightening to listen to "Musical Box" by Genesis in this regard: it seems that DT has stripped away its essence and uses it as the backbone of their music, a true "Schema." This can be noticed not only at the level of individual pieces, but also at the level of albums (throughout their career, they have gone through the various trends of the styles they draw from, with the only exception being the latest album, probably the most honest), and at the musician level: each of them is a melting pot of schools and references, anonymous, uncreative in the literal sense of the term.

Holy cow, Orion, frankly you're a bit sad.. :-) you search for anything to prove that I contradict myself, when it seems all too evident that I’ve demonstrated the opposite... instead of desperately seeking the SINGLE sentence or even the SINGLE word where I would have contradicted myself, why don’t you try expressing your opinion? Responding to the content? Well.. as I already told you, it's clear that if you extract single sentences, the meaning changes.. this is a rather petty pre-television game. Furthermore, you say that now I would have said something quite different from before; false: I just explained it in another way to clarify it for you, I said exactly the same things; it’s just that evidently you don't share my concept of "originality" (but for me, it was taken for granted that it included the idea of reworking) or you haven’t read all my posts carefully, especially those where I responded to Mario.

Furthermore, let's talk about Dream Theater: it is not at all true that there is a reinterpretation in their music. Dream Theater, going a bit too far, beyond appearances and the cross-genre trends that various rock bands began to develop in the 1980s, are fundamentally based on the concept of fusing different styles. However, their fusion is ephemeral. Because there is, in fact, no musical poetics that, drawing inspiration from various genres, condenses to form a distinctive style. All the elements from which their music originates remain essentially the same... (I will continue...)