Mike Portnoy

zildjian_dude101 said:
He sings in a lot of songs. More in their newer stuff than in their older stuff. For example, As I Am, The Test That Stumped Them All, and In the Name of God, to name a few.

Ah, i didn't know that. I'll have to check it out.
 
i, as well, expected more positive feedback on mike portnoy.

dream theater as a whole definitely does have an amazing amount of talent (with the exception of the singer). i actualy find it amazing that so many people have so much negative feedback on him.

dream theater does not rip off rush. there may be one or two songs that sound alike, or whatever, but, as a whole, it cant be said that dream theater rips off rush. when was the last time rush did an overture? and a honky-tonk breakdown? ive heard it said many times that neal peart is one of the only people who could outplay mike portnoy. he cant. mike portnoy could play rush songs, but i cant imagine peart playing DT songs. and dream theater as a whole has a much better sound, and is way more technical. (with the exception of the singers... both of which could... use work?)

and, i completely agree with whats posted above me, with the exception of the statement: "I guess Peart is a much better musician, but Mike is a better drummer." Mike is a better drummer. however, he is also the better musician. mike portnoy writes at least half of the lyrics and a third of the music on all of the dream theater albums. he also plays with neal morse, transatlantic, and liquid tension experiment. aside from that, in many DT songs they blend so many different types and styles of music. mike portnoy is an incredibly diverse drummer, and can play a variety of styles without a problem.

peart definitely is an amazing drummer and has potential, but portnoy tops him.
 
tymile said:
i actualy find it amazing that so many people have so much negative feedback on him.

Eh, I just really can't take the whole approach. It all seems very stiff and intellectualised, while similarly dense and complex playing like you'll see out of Danny Carey or Thomas Haake has more flow, purpose and passion. IMHO.

dream theater does not rip off rush.

They have clearly ripped off Tool, RATM and Pantera though ;)

peart definitely is an amazing drummer and has potential

I think you have to credit him with a lot more than potential these days, he's something of a legend in a way that Portnoy certainly isn't yet. Peart defined a style of playing, if anything Portnoy has merely refined it a little.
 
i can see where youre coming from. a lot of people dont like the whole technical idea and are much more into the groove of it. but i think that portnoy definitely is a more technical drummer than peart, whether you think technical outweighs the passion and the feel of the music, i think thats a matter of personal choice.

as for ripping off other bands, though... dream theaters first album debuted in 1989, while rage wasnt even together until 1992. not saying that they couldnt rip off rage in their later years, but they had a lot of material by that time without even ever hearing of the band. and i have never heard anything that sounds like a tool or pantera ripoff, nor have i ever heard anyone say that before.

and i agree that mike portnoy takes influence from neal peart. but that doesnt mean that he cant be a better drummer than him. but, again, that comes down to personal choice - which style appeals more personally to you.

and i guess saying neal peart had "potential" was misused. what i meant was he had a lot of talent, but mike portnoy is still better.
 
tymile said:
as for ripping off other bands, though... dream theaters first album debuted in 1989, while rage wasnt even together until 1992. not saying that they couldnt rip off rage in their later years, but they had a lot of material by that time without even ever hearing of the band. and i have never heard anything that sounds like a tool or pantera ripoff, nor have i ever heard anyone say that before.

You've got your dates a bit wrong with RATM, IIRC their first album was out in 1991 which put them working together as a group well earlier than that.

But that's a bit beside the point. You've never heard anything that sounds like a Tool or Pantera ripoff?

Oh boy have I got an MP3 for you...

What you hear in this is:

"By Demons Be Driven" by Pantera vs "The Test That Stumped Them All" by DT
"46&2" by Tool vs "Home" by DT.
"46&2" by Tool (again!) vs "The Great Debate" by DT.

There's more, of course. The clip from "Home" is shortly followed by a fairly obvious RATM crib, etc. But this goes for a minute and a half, which seems about long enough.

Worth mentioning is that not only are these cribs very similar in terms of actual notes and phrasing, they're also very similar in their purpose and positions in the songs. "By Demons Be Driven" has the chorus riff stolen for a chorus, "Home" uses the intro bass line from 46&2 for its intro bass line, "The Great Debate" uses a strikingly similar section to the one in "46&2" for a similar purpose at a similar position structurally.
 
joe morris, all i can say about u is your a mug!!! HOW CAN U WALK OUT OF A DT CONCERT GOD DAMMIT!!! i saw them last october, i then triued to get tickets for the second night but failed :( anyways mike portnoy is true talent, anyone who takes digs at his kits are stupid, because if u look at the new albino monster, i will see its actually quite simple... on one side 3 toms, 2 floors, 2 bass, 1 snare (octoban and timbales) and some other goodies. on the other he has 1 tom 1 bass 2 floors!!! no octobans, no gong bass... take a look at this...

http://www.tama.com/artists/featured/portnoy.asp
 

Attachments

  • Albino.jpg
    Albino.jpg
    112.6 KB · Views: 23,379
finnhiggins said:
Eh, I just really can't take the whole approach. It all seems very stiff and intellectualised, while similarly dense and complex playing like you'll see out of Danny Carey or Thomas Haake has more flow, purpose and passion. IMHO.



They have clearly ripped off Tool, RATM and Pantera though ;)



I think you have to credit him with a lot more than potential these days, he's something of a legend in a way that Portnoy certainly isn't yet. Peart defined a style of playing, if anything Portnoy has merely refined it a little.

well u dont no much, they havent ripped of any band...

they make the same kind of music, and portnoy has recreated the old, which the younger generation havnt heard much of, and brought it to them, think of it as covering up old music by making it sound new, if it wasnt for dt i wouldnt never of nown about rush or tool... BUT one thing that we can all be sure about it, that dt are better than tool and ratm because there still together!!!!
 
Well finn, considering the odd meter of both of those tunes, there really isn't much room for too much creativity, and still having it sound like rock music. Prog is prog.

The difference between DT and Pantera (I like Pantera better, btw), is that DT actually thinks of the stuff and writes it out in musical form and structure. Pantera just takes a hit off the old bong and says, yeah, that sounds really good, let's do that. I'm not saying that makes DT better, I'm just saying, it makes them less likely to be the one's ripping off anyone else.

Also the indian sounding riffs (or whatever it is) are fairly stereo-typical sounding eastern music. It is just a coincidence that they sound similar. Our western ears hear that kind of music and it "all just kinda sounds the same".

Now the most important part. Even if DT DID rip it off, the DT interpretations are much more lavish and interesting sounding, while the Tool part is more commercial and radio-friendly sounding.

I don't get your point about Tool having such great chart success and DT doesn't...so what?

I watched Budokhan again and found yet another thing impressive about Portnoy. I would encourage all aspiring metal wannabees to watch how he plays his cymbals. He doesn't bash them in with huge strokes, yet they are still loud and powerful sounding. hmmmm, I wonder how many cymbals Mike breaks, and what his opinion is about "hard hitters".
 
Stu_Strib said:
Well finn, considering the odd meter of both of those tunes, there really isn't much room for too much creativity, and still having it sound like rock music. Prog is prog.

Are you kidding? There's no fewer ways of playing rock in 7/8 (the case for most of the stuff here) than in 4/4. Not only that, even if there was then there's a limitation on how you can phrase there's still no excuse for basically playing the same parts. Which is happening in all of these examples. When Tom Morello swiped a bit of "Walk This Way" on the first Audioslave album I seriously doubt that anybody would say "Oh, he's limited by the fact that he's playing in 4/4 so he had to make a riff using the same notes in a very similar order and rhythm". They said "Hey, that's Walk This Way!".

EDIT: Also, most of those aren't actually in the same time sig as the original, or if they are it's 4/4. "The test that stumped them all" is in 7+7+6 while the Pantera track is in 4/4, both the bass riffs are 4/4, and the other 46&2 crib is in 4/4 as well. No excuse there!

The difference between DT and Pantera (I like Pantera better, btw), is that DT actually thinks of the stuff and writes it out in musical form and structure. Pantera just takes a hit off the old bong and says, yeah, that sounds really good, let's do that. I'm not saying that makes DT better, I'm just saying, it makes them less likely to be the one's ripping off anyone else.

Or it would, if every album I've listened to so far didn't have a lot of very obvious cribs from albums that members of DT regularly reference as influences. Portnoy has referenced Pantera and Tool as influences in a number of interviews, and talked about them in some depth. I doubt he's unfamiliar with the songs in question here, given that they're two albums that are considered by many to be the creative apex of each of the given bands...

Also the indian sounding riffs (or whatever it is) are fairly stereo-typical sounding eastern music. It is just a coincidence that they sound similar. Our western ears hear that kind of music and it "all just kinda sounds the same".

No way. That's not an "indian sounding" riff, that's a Tool-sounding riff. If you can find me an Indian song that sounds like that I'll be very surprised, I listen to quite a lot of Indian and Middle Eastern music and am usually pretty capable of telling a riff in a given genre apart from another one. Not only that, both riffs are played on the same instrument (bass) in a similar neck position (up near the 12th fret) and are used for the same purpose in the song (intro).

As for the coincidence idea.. I'd maybe buy that, if these kind of things didn't keep turning up. For crying out loud, there's two cribs from the same song (46&2) off one of Mike Portnoy's favourite albums (Aenima). I don't think Portnoy would hear those bits and not think of Tool, given that he clearly loves the album (read some interviews), the DT stuff came out subsequent to that album and they sound nearly exactly alike. If somebody in my band played a riff like that I'd say "That's a Tool rip-off!". You think I know that album better than Mike does?

That's not saying that Tool are fantastically original and DT are clearly slavish imitations. I can show you a similar example of Tool ripping off Rush (intro to Lateralus = swung version of bridge from Test For Echo on guitar) but they do it considerably less regularly and in a much less obvious manner. They don't, for example, grab whole sections of songs, change a couple of notes and then use them for the same function in their own song.

The worst DT offender yet is that one from "The Great Debate" which not only borrows phrasing but also vocal inflections (I can virtually hear Maynard James Keenan singing "Life-to-save-life" like that, and it's not a very typical vocal approach for James LaBrie) and even structure - they use a riff under the vocals in a similar way, then punch it out staccato into a stop. The whole song is very Tool-influenced, but that bit is just directly lifted.

Now the most important part. Even if DT DID rip it off, the DT interpretations are much more lavish and interesting sounding, while the Tool part is more commercial and radio-friendly sounding.

We'll have to disagree on this point. I think the DT versions sound like cheesy prog nonsense while the originals are actually quite good. But which you like better is a bit beside the point, they're clearly grabbing whole chunks of stuff. If they want to play covers, why don't they play covers?

I don't get your point about Tool having such great chart success and DT doesn't...so what?

That was just in response to the suggestion that DT are "Bringing music like that to the masses". It's arguable that DT bring a lot less of that kind of music to the masses given that Tool's last album entered at #1 in the charts and DT's was what... #42 or something?

No other argument. It just seemed like a silly idea. "Oh yeah, that #42 album was totally bringing one of the better known songs from that other multi-platinum album to the masses, and stuff".
 
Last edited:
Actual time signatures aside, any odd meters and phrasing generally sound homogenous to me on these prog rock albums.

As for the Indian stuff. It probably isn't anywhere near authentic. It is more likely what Tool, DT, and the West in general THINKS indian music sounds like.

Coincidentally, Tool's logo is written with Arabic script, but it says "lamamel" in Arabic. To the untrained, it looks all middle-easterny though. That's my point about the Indian stuff.

I dunno. Your points are well put, but I just find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that a purist (and, yes, pretentious at times) Prog band that are all HIGHLY trained musicians at great schools would look to Pantera and Tool for inspiration. Maybe these are not-so-subtle tips 'o the hat to the more mainstream guys? Even then, why wouldn't they just rip-off the more mainstream riffs, like Walk, or Cowboys?
 
Stu_Strib said:
I dunno. Your points are well put, but I just find it EXTREMELY hard to believe that a purist (and, yes, pretentious at times) Prog band that are all HIGHLY trained musicians at great schools would look to Pantera and Tool for inspiration. Maybe these are not-so-subtle tips 'o the hat to the more mainstream guys? Even then, why wouldn't they just rip-off the more mainstream riffs, like Walk, or Cowboys?

They're quite open about being inspired by both bands, actually. Go have a read of some old Portnoy interviews.

What do you find harder to believe - that DT would be comfortable doing the occasional quote of other band's stuff or that they would be oblivious to the fact that they're lifting whole sections from some of their favourite albums?

EDIT: Oh, and given that Tool are about the nearest thing out there to popular 70s-style prog (along with The Mars Volta) I'd be quite surprised if DT weren't into them. DT sound like an 80s prog band, Tool sound like a 70s prog band mixed up with The Melvins.
 
I guess I can't see it objectively, because I really can't get into Tool at all (forced myself to listen to every LP and EP). I can ALMOST get into Dream Theater, until after the 20th minute of the second song, when they've already played every lick 3 times already. My brother loves them. I think he's lack of musical knowledge gives him a false sense of 'awesomeness' about them (that goes for any Prog band really).

Good analogy about 70s prog vs. 80s prog.

One thing for sure, Prog folks need to work on their vocals.
 
I honestly don't know why people argue about these things. It's a matter of opinion, and it's darn near impossible to change someone's opinion. Give it a rest.

As for my opinion, I see it as: there are so many bands and so many songs out there, someone's bound to copy someone else by complete accident. The fact that DT is influenced by many types of music and plays such a wide variety only increases their chance of these accidental copies.

My 2 cents
 
exactly.

and to not respect a band, or any of the members of that band, because their music seems similar to that of another band, is rediculous.

dt portnoy is completely right.
 
Yeah, but I don't get the whole "DT is influenced by Tool" comment. DT has been around for so much longer, it's almost sacrilege. Can a much older band be 'influenced' by bands that came after them, in the same vein? If anything, I'd say it would be an homage to the younger Tool and likes.

This would be like saying the Stones are influenced by the Hives. (maybe not that extreme, but hopefully my point is understood).
 
Stu_Strib said:
Yeah, but I don't get the whole "DT is influenced by Tool" comment. DT has been around for so much longer, it's almost sacrilege. Can a much older band be 'influenced' by bands that came after them, in the same vein? If anything, I'd say it would be an homage to the younger Tool and likes.

This would be like saying the Stones are influenced by the Hives. (maybe not that extreme, but hopefully my point is understood).

DT hasn't been around for "So much longer" than most of these bands. DT had their first album out in... what... 88? 89? Pantera had albums out around that time, albeit hair-metal. Tool's first EP came out in '92, and they hit it big in '94. DT's first notable album (Images & Words) was what... 91? There's 3-4 years in it, tops.

As for the idea that an older band can't possibly be influenced by newer acts, how do you explain Miles Davis? He was already a legend fully decades before his interest in rock music drove him to start playing fusion in the late 60s. A key influence in this was Hendrix, who was clearly a considerably younger act than Miles. Similarly, Radiohead made a notable move towards playing electronic music mid-career, influenced by the likes of Aphex Twin. ?uestlove talks openly about how the programming on The Pharcyde's "Labcabincalifornia" made him revamp his entire style - after The Roots had already hit it big. DT clearly did make mid-career shift at several points in different directions. Their early material was much more Rush/Queensrych oriented, but with Awake they added more elements of 90s metal. Post 1996 they've started sounding more like Tool on a number of occasions.

Denying people the right to be influenced by the music they hear just because they're famous is a bit silly, don't you think? The Stones/Hives comparison is silly because the Hives are trying to sound like the Stones were some forty years ago. DT only started recording stuff that sounded very similar to Tool well after Tool had released multi-platinum albums.

I don't see why everybody is so touchy about this particular point. Portnoy is, as a player, very open about his influences and all of these bands are on the list. Do you want me to find quotes? If somebody cites Miles Davis as an influence and then uses the bass line from "So What" in a song do you consider it an accident?
 
so, are you saying, that just because a band doesnt play the same exact style in every single song and album (which almosts defeats the idea of prog already) they have become influenced by newer bands?

so, because dream theater made a shift, they were seddenly copying tool? youre saying that every time they took a turn in direction in their type of music, it had to be because they were "copying" another band.

sorry.

no two of dream theaters album have the same sound. each is such a blend and mix of styles that it would be hard to classify it as just one genre. and your comment about awake being "affected by 90s metal."

awake was put out in the nineties. go figure.

and, as stu strib said earlier, the fact that tool came out so much later than drea, theater (and three to four years is a lot of time) can so act as proof that dream theater did not copy them. when an already big band hears this up and coming band's brand new debut cd, rarely will they go try and copy it.

what do you think, mike portnoy and john petrucci were sitting around one day, listening to the brand new tool album, and mike goes, "hey! these tool kids are pretty good. lets blatantly copy them because we only have an unsurpassed amount of talent and have come up with plenty of completely original material ourselves. hell, we have another decade at least worth of original material, and we can outplay most bands around. so, we MUST COPY TOOL."

sorry, thats not the way it works. from the sounds of it, tool takes an amazing amount of inluence and idea from dream theater.

the fact is, two bands can sound alike. almost flawlessly alike. it doesnt have to mean that one copied the other. especially on a level with dream theater.
 
Something just popped into my head.

Now, I'm not saying that Dream Theater did copy any body, but even if they were to copy someone, who cares?!? It's perfectly legal to copy other bands. Just look at the millions of cover songs out there. And like I said before, it's easy to copy by accident. Particularly if you have certain influences (Every band has their influences, no one grew up and decided to play music without listening to any music first). If you have influences, it's easier to copy without even realizing it because that's what you grew up listening to and it's something that you like.

For example, I am influenced by (among many others) Megadeth and Dream Theater, but that doesn't mean that if I decide to play a cool tom groove, I must be copying Megadeth's "Trust" and Dream Theater's "Home" or "Metropolis Pt. 1". It just means that I like that style and want to use it in my song. If it happens to be too much like one of the aforementioned songs, then oh well...who cares?

I just don't see the point in arguing about this. If you insist that Dream Theater are talentless copy-cats, you have all the right in the world to think that.
If you insist that they are all original, you have equally as much right to think that. Both are a matter of opinion, and if you're hell-bent on trying to change people's opinions, I got one thing to say to you: Good Luck, because it's impossible.

There's 2 cents more for you.
 
Back
Top