Yes, Dream Theater. The band that every prog head or music fan seems to have a negative opinion about. Personally, I don't get it, but perhaps I could be enlightened into the minds of those who hold the opinion of them being a bad band. I will say my say on it obviously, what kind of journal entry would this be without my say?
Anyway, I know this question probably gets thrown around a lot, but I really am curious to know why people seem to find them so not listenable. I've seen people say things like "they're an embarrassment to the prog community" or "they say they're prog, but they don't show any prog elements in their music". I don't see any reason for people to repeat those answers as I've seen them thrown around one too many times. However, I will focus on the one where they state that Dream Theater shouldn't be considered a prog band:
No proggy elements in any of their songs? Have you heard Learning To Live? The intro shines with progressive rock, not to mention the entire Octavarium album is one of the best prog albums that I have heard. To say Dream Theater aren't a prog band is like saying Nightwish isn't a symphonic metal band, or Arch Enemy aren't a heavy/death metal band. They all fall under the category of being mis-categorized based on their sound. I will however admit that a couple of DT's albums like Systematic Chaos and Black Clouds & Silver Linings are the last albums I would suggest if someone was interested in hearing the prog side of DT, in that same respect, I would say that every other album before Systematic Chaos and yes this includes When Dreams and Day Unite are shining factors in what I would consider some damn good modern day progressive rock.
With that being said, I don't think it's very fair to say they aren't considered progressive rock when a lot of people hold the opinion that prog was at it's highest ranking in the 70's and 80's, which I don't see much problem admitting to agreeing with that to some extent, but with Dream Theater were obviously not going to get the extent of progressive rock as we did with Yes, Pink Floyd, Caravan, King Crimson and the like, HOWEVER, that doesn't mean they should be shunned out of the progressive rock community just for starting later. I mean...in all fairness, they released their first full length album in 89, so with all due respect, I would consider them more of a modern progressive rock band. And I hold the opinion of their being nothing wrong with using elements from the 70's and 80's and using them in your own music that sounds "newer".
I'll make a point about the popular opinion of DT being a terrible band. I've seen them live. I don't know if that holds much weight in terms of an overall impression, but I don't see the reason to think they are a mediocre band, when they show so much passion and strength in their music. I see that with their studio albums alone, but it increased when I saw them in concert for the first time. They know how to perform, and they know how to make the crowd happy.
Anyway, I'm interested in other people's views as I've left it for open discussion.