mista

but who are the ulan baator?

You're better as a guitarist, Lexus, but how sad the pieces...

Awesome and somewhat unknown Pavlov's... what a singer... I only have one of their albums but I can't remember what the hell it's called!

We understand each other, DaveJon. With "it means a lot" I didn't mean to be ironic. I'm simply noting from this preference of yours a difference in views between us regarding guitarists that I don't think is the right time to dissect or address right now. To help you understand better, I'll share the link to a review where I criticized Petrucci in favor of Malmsteen: Live in Denver - G3 - Recensione di Matt7 I'll re-listen to Divine, which should already be on my iPod!

Yes, I would say that the discussion between Muse and Symphony X can be considered closed now that you've acknowledged the lack of compositional innovation in both. I just note that while this shortcoming leads you to define Muse as poor, for Symphony X, the same limitation does not prevent a positive judgment. The fact that you consider Petrucci better than Malmsteen as a guitarist really says a lot (I'll refer you to another discussion I've already had on this topic, and maybe I'll point out the details to you), and consequently, I prefer not to engage in a quarrel myself. By the way, could you point out the Symphony X albums/songs you think are the best so I can make a focused re-listen to see if the judgment I formed based on my past listens can change?

Come on, let me be ironic; I think I've made it clear that I was just playing. After all, it's a risk you have to accept when you flaunt the superiority of your listening habits (which I don't doubt, just to be clear, I think you're quite the connoisseur after all)! Anyway, you didn't really answer my question. You say that Symphony X is a fundamental band in prog metal, that they are technical, and that they can be influenced by DT and Malmsteen (who, to be honest, aren't really their contemporaries), which I fundamentally agree with; my judgment on Symphony X is indeed positive. However, when it comes to compositional innovation, Symphony X, forgive me, cannot be considered innovators at all, not in the slightest. From this perspective, they're certainly not better than Muse; that’s all there is to it. Regarding the sound dynamics, I assure you that I expressed my opinion with good reason; I find their albums sound very cold and flat in terms of dynamics (just like those of DT for that matter; a different story for Malmsteen, who is the only true shredder with a soul). Best regards.

Sorry for the mistakes guys, I hope it’s clear...

But no Bisius, what does it have to do with it? I also prefer Symphony X to Muse and I know very well that they have nothing to do with Muse themselves (who, by the way, surpass Dream Theater 200 to 1, excuse me, but that's nonsense). My comment (a little jokingly) was directed solely at DaveJon, who called them terrible (compared to the bands he listens to) based on the Muse's lack of musical innovation. Since DaveJon also listens to Symphony X, I wanted to make a comparison based solely on the parameter of "compositional innovation." Got it?

Eh eh DaveJon, your proverbial modesty is a beacon of debaser ;-) But let me point out something that I pull out of the hat: you listen to and appreciate Symphony X (which I also occasionally listen to, to be fair, they are still part of the genre I belong to musically more or less, and one of my bands). But excuse me, do you find Symphony X, in terms of composition (forget that they are good at playing), so much better than Muse? When I listen to Symphony X (maybe because I know the genre better), I hear Malmsteen blended with Dream Theater (with a sound that's a bit too cold and lacking dynamics) and not much more. I'm not doubting that they've written some beautiful songs, but when it comes to musical innovation, I certainly wouldn't say they are years ahead of Muse (whom you describe as terrible for supposedly copying riffs already heard in the seventies)! What do you think?

Well, even downright terrible! They’ve done some good pieces too, but the compositional solutions are a bit monotone: vocal melodies that lean towards neo-classical accompanied by minor-harmonic chord progressions (am I the only one hearing Malmsteen in certain progressions?) all seasoned with pounding on the piano and plenty of baroque/electronic touches. However, they have their own style, a charismatic singer with a nice voice, and an "electric" sound. I don’t think they’ll ever make that leap in quality that the reviewer hopes for; perhaps they lack that extra something at an artistic level, but you can’t call them fools...