Music Theory Questions

[Securb]

Re: Music Theory Questions

I think a lot of you don't really grasp what a thorough internalization of theory really means.

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Music Theory Questions

LOL. I've already done the Ignore List thing; I don't see this discussion ending well.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Music Theory Questions

This is only speaking about someone who intends to support themselves on music alone. As someone studying audio engineering, yeah, knowing theory is important because it can allow me to talk to musicians better, but knowing theory isn't important for the guy who just wants to play along to their favorite songs in their bedroom.

Well, I speak from my experience- supporting myself through playing/teaching music. If you just want to play in your bedroom, who cares? Do what you want. Have fun. That's the only goal there.

 

[2ndhandband]

Re: Music Theory Questions

Well, I speak from my experience- supporting myself through playing/teaching music. If you just want to play in your bedroom, who cares? Do what you want. Have fun. That's the only goal there.

You and I are coming from the same place... but I see that coming from that place gets you put on the ignore list. My thinking is why bother with anything if your goal is not mastery? That attitude had kept me from having to work for a wage for most of my adult life.

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Music Theory Questions

I'm guessing lots of people here can make the rock in a credible fashion, but can you sit in with a jazz combo armed with nothing but your copy of the real book, in a setting where the bandleader sometimes calls the tune in a key other than the one written? Could you hold down the groove in a funk setting? Can you do a 4 set bar show as the primary soloist in a blues band and play with enough variety that the whole night doesn't sound like one long shuffle in A... even though it is? Could you go out on the road with a small-time recording artist you never heard of before given nothing but 12 hours notice and a tape of their last show? Can you play an hour of classical repertoire for a highbrow event? Could you scribble out a string score at a recording session?

For me theory is just one tool in the toolbox. But it's not mandatory all the time to utilize that tool to make music. For me, all but your last question could be accomplished (and most of it I have experience doing) without thinking about theory at all in the terms you've stated. For example, on a guitar transposition is easiest of all instruments. Playing 4 hours with variety can be accomplished with experience instead of rote theory, by building up a 'library' of various phrases and things to play over time - doesn't have to come from theory, could just be either copying bits from various music you've heard, an instructional video, or self trial and error. Don't have to understand the theory if your ear is good enough to tell right from wrong musically. Going on the road with 12 hours notice is more an issue of how quick of a learner you are.

Something that seems to remain a tacit undercurrent and not sufficiently discussed is that making music involves a combination of skill and talent, in some varying degree of both. If you can use theory to jump in right away and be productive, that is a learned skill and more power to you. There are also guys who can't tell you the names of the chords they play, but they can sit in with a jazz combo and perform rings around some of the best-schooled theory players, and do it all with much superior feel and soul that really reaches into the heart of an audience, resonates with them, sinking deep into the audience memory with their performance. But theory and talent are still just tools in the toolbox. Some have more skill at their disposal. Some have more talent or innate ability. The key is having just enough of each in whatever degree necessary to make music that would communicate well with others who aren't musicians, even if only for personal satisfaction. Otherwise, why bother at all?

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: Music Theory Questions

You and I are coming from the same place... but I see that coming from that place gets you put on the ignore list. My thinking is why bother with anything if your goal is not mastery? That attitude had kept me from having to work for a wage for most of my adult life.

You're not on my ignore list and I value your opinion. But just because I value it doesn't mean I think you're right. There's a lot of stuff that I do for fun. I'm a video gamer, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna become a professional gamer. I like to cook with my girlfriend. Doesn't mean I'm gonna be an executive chef.

 

[Securb]

Re: Music Theory Questions

Well, I speak from my experience- supporting myself through playing/teaching music. If you just want to play in your bedroom, who cares? Do what you want. Have fun. That's the only goal there.

Dave I respectfully disagree, kind of. It really depends on the gig. I have done blues gigs where no one the stage could read a single note but all of the musicians were world class players. To your argument it is difficult to do a Jazz or in some cases a GB gig without some knowledge of theory. That being said there are plenty of people making money in the industry that don't know the first thing about theroy.

 

[2ndhandband]

Re: Music Theory Questions

For me theory is just one tool in the toolbox. But it's not mandatory all the time to utilize that tool to make music. For me, all but your last question could be accomplished (and most of it I have experience doing) without thinking about theory at all in the terms you've stated. For example, on a guitar transposition is easiest of all instruments. Playing 4 hours with variety can be accomplished with experience instead of rote theory, by building up a 'library' of various phrases and things to play over time - doesn't have to come from theory, could just be either copying bits from various music you've heard, an instructional video, or self trial and error. Don't have to understand the theory if your ear is good enough to tell right from wrong musically. Going on the road with 12 hours notice is more an issue of how quick of a learner you are.

Something that seems to remain a tacit undercurrent and not sufficiently discussed is that making music involves a combination of skill and talent, in some varying degree of both. If you can use theory to jump in right away and be productive, that is a learned skill and more power to you. There are also guys who can't tell you the names of the chords they play, but they can sit in with a jazz combo and perform rings around some of the best-schooled theory players, and do it all with much superior feel and soul that really reaches into the heart of an audience, resonates with them, sinking deep into the audience memory with their performance. But theory and talent are still just tools in the toolbox. Some have more skill at their disposal. Some have more talent or innate ability. The key is having just enough of each in whatever degree necessary to make music that would communicate well with others who aren't musicians, even if only for personal satisfaction. Otherwise, why bother at all?

Theory is a shortcut to all of that stuff... it's an encyclopedic list of things that will and won't work, including stuff you wouldn't have thought of otherwise. It will especially save you when you move outside the realm of straight-ahead popular music. I'll dispute your notion that someone who can't even identify chords is going to give a credible jazz performance. Some of those progressions you can't get by just soloing with your straight major and minor scales, to say nothing of the harmonic knowledge you need when you're comping. Most jazz players I know have an encyclopedic knowledge of scales and harmony, and have drilled on it enough they can access that knowledge in realtime which is really the end-goal for all of it.

 

[2ndhandband]

Re: Music Theory Questions

You're not on my ignore list and I value your opinion. But just because I value it doesn't mean I think you're right. There's a lot of stuff that I do for fun. I'm a video gamer, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna become a professional gamer. I like to cook with my girlfriend. Doesn't mean I'm gonna be an executive chef.

Yeah... I don't have hobbies. Side effect of being self-employed. If I'm not doing stuff with my kids or chasing women, I'm playing guitar, mixing sound, or doing something that relates to those things.

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: Music Theory Questions

Yeah... I don't have hobbies. Side effect of being self-employed. If I'm not doing stuff with my kids or chasing women, I'm playing guitar, mixing sound, or doing something that relates to those things.

And I feel for you and understand that. I think we generally agree on this topic, but we're coming at it from two different perspectives and so our messages are different.

 

[Securb]

Re: Music Theory Questions

I don't think anyone is arguing the value of education or bettering yourself. I think the disconnect is the correlation between music theory and success/talent. There are plenty of talented musicians and composers that can not read or write music; I will use Jimi Hendrix, Danny Elfman, and Paul McCartney as examples. Then there are others like Mick Ronson who wrote most of Bowie's string and horn charts in the bathroom of Abby Road on the fly. Mick Ronson was a talented arranger and did the charts for the extra cash. Yes, theory is a great tool to get a musician to the next level, it is not the only tool that can get you there.

 

[Securb]

Re: Music Theory Questions

I'll dispute your notion that someone who can't even identify chords is going to give a credible jazz performance.

I would argue that some of the Jazz masters did not have traditional training and more often than not they played by ear and did not read music or apply theory.

Sounds credible to me

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Music Theory Questions

I'll dispute your notion that someone who can't even identify chords is going to give a credible jazz performance. Some of those progressions you can't get by just soloing with your straight major and minor scales, to say nothing of the harmonic knowledge you need when you're comping.

I'll see your dispute, and raise you a mere partial list of self-taught, extremely competent jazz players of all walks.

Self-taught jazz musicians

Guitar
Django Reinhardt - who could only use 2 fingers on his left hand and still played rings around people with all 5 fingers working
Les Paul
Wes Montgomery
Johnny Smith

Trumpet
Dizzie Gillespie
Thelonious Monk
Louis Armstrong
Chet Baker

Piano
Art Tatum
Les McCann
Gene Harris
Vijay Iyer
Joey Alexander

Sax
Fred Anderson
Dave Schildkraut
Jan Garbarek - Learned the fingerings even before he had a sax at 14
Peter Brotzmann
Trevor Watts
Ornette Coleman
George Haslam
John Butcher
Dewey Redman
Scott Hamilton
Danny Moss
Peter King
Dick Morrissey
Zoot Sims
Nick Brignola
Art Pepper
Sonny Rollins - but he had classical training on other instuments as a kid.
Eddie Lockjaw Davis
Plas Johnson (the guy from the Pink Panther Theme)
Barney Wilen
Johnny Hodges
Lucky Thompson

...anyway, theory can help but it's clear it isn't everything. If theory is a shortcut, then sometimes it may deprive you of the true journey.

 

[Securb]

Re: Music Theory Questions

I'll see your dispute, and raise you a mere partial list of self-taught, extremely competent jazz players of all walks.

Self-taught jazz musicians

Piano
Art Tatum

I love Art's story. He was sight impaired from birth. His mother worked in a movie theater and would seat him at the player piano during the movies to keep him busy. Art learned to play by placing his fingers on the keys as they were depressed by the player piano. Not only did he quickly learn how to play but people were shocked a child was playing pieces written for 4-hands.

 

[2ndhandband]

Re: Music Theory Questions

A lot of those guys were self-taught, sure... so was I. Doesn't mean they didn't have a solid grounding in harmony. I didn't get that in school either. I don't believe for a second somebody is following a jazz chord chart with all the extensions and substitutions with zero knowledge of what they are playing. When somebody is improvising very complex ideas and tells me it's all intuitive I am suspicious to put it mildly. I remember back in the 90s when Marty Friedman was doing press for a new Megadeth record he was claiming (as was in vogue at the time) to have no knowledge of music fundamentals. Then I went and listened to the record and his very selective and intelligent use of some pretty exotic scales and all I could say was... I call bull****.

Don't get me wrong... I'm HUGELY in favor of developing your ear. If you're serious about this the very first thing you should do is throw away all of your tab. But there's places your ear alone isn't going to take you.

 

[Securb]

Re: Music Theory Questions

When somebody is improvising very complex ideas and tells me it's all intuitive I am suspicious to put it mildly.

We gave you examples and a clip what else do you need. Most of the Jazz musicians we know as greats came from meager beginnings. They had bearly enough money for food let alone music lessons. A lot of them were functionally illiterate let alone being musically literate.

I don't believe for a second somebody is following a jazz chord chart with all the extensions and substitutions with zero knowledge of what they are playing.

Just because the musician is not versed in theory doesn't mean they have zero knowledge of what they are playing.

 

[Johnny the Kid]

Re: Music Theory Questions

A lot of those guys were self-taught, sure... so was I. Doesn't mean they didn't have a solid grounding in harmony. I didn't get that in school either. I don't believe for a second somebody is following a jazz chord chart with all the extensions and substitutions with zero knowledge of what they are playing. When somebody is improvising very complex ideas and tells me it's all intuitive I am suspicious to put it mildly. I remember back in the 90s when Marty Friedman was doing press for a new Megadeth record he was claiming (as was in vogue at the time) to have no knowledge of music fundamentals. Then I went and listened to the record and his very selective and intelligent use of some pretty exotic scales and all I could say was... I call bull****.

Don't get me wrong... I'm HUGELY in favor of developing your ear. If you're serious about this the very first thing you should do is throw away all of your tab. But there's places your ear alone isn't going to take you.

I don't need to know that it's called the E Phrygian scale to know that if I can play E-E with no accidentals over the Em chord in a piece in C major,

 

[cato]

Music Theory Questions

fascinating discussion guys. early on in this thread, regarding what people can or can't do with any combination of skill and theory-knowledge, i immediately thought of composers who were considered by their peers to be mediocre at the instruments they dabbled in, but produced some of the most beautiful pieces imaginable. there were of course composers of the boroque/classical/romantic periods and big band era who were considered virtuosos, but i wonder how many talented composers only had a rudimentary knowledge of one or more instruments (since most played a few), but who excelled at composing based on virtually theory-knowledge alone. at a young age i fell in love with jazz (among other styles) so my dad pointed me to stan kenton. with the caveat that anyone's assessment of another's skill is highly relative to their own skill and that of others in the particular scene, i remember marveling - and to this day - how intensely complex, unique, and ball-kicking his arrangements were considering he was found to be somewhat humdrum at his instrument - piano - by his peers, and still retrospectively. if his skill truly were objectively mediocre, it is remarkable that his arrangements for his orchestras had the same effect on his peers that paganini's playing did on his (my hyperbole). that all changed of course with the offshoot of bebop at the time cause bebop was by definition composers improv'ing with their band mates, so they had to be intensely skilled, to go along with their theory knowledge. in other words, the bebop bandleaders, regardless of what instrument they played, had to know how to smoke, not just arrange. in relation to the debate above, composers clearly could compose intense stuff without virtuosity; but coltrane, bird, miles, cole? how much of the insanity of their arrangements were feel/ear, theory, or a combo of both. i wonder if they ever stopped touring and jamming long enough to have entertained (what they surely would've thought was) such a pedestrian question.
anyways.....

 

[Securb]

Re: Music Theory Questions

. in relation to the debate above, composers clearly could compose intense stuff without virtuosity; but coltrane, bird, miles, cole? how much of the insanity of their arrangements were feel/ear, theory, or a combo of both.
anyways.....

Miles was a sponge for theory, he was constantly striving for next level knowledge. Sometime after Sketches of Spain, he started studying George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization. The book is not a weekend read in any way. After reading Russell's book Miles emerged as the "modern" Miles that went on to write In A Silent Way and *****'s Brew. George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization is some next level stuff that will make your brain hurt reading it. I can turn you on to a copy if you want to check it out.

 

[2ndhandband]

Re: Music Theory Questions

I don't need to know that it's called the E Phrygian scale to know that if I can play E-E with no accidentals over the Em chord in a piece in C major,

That is only the beginning of the possibilities inherent in the Phrygian mode. And have you ever monkeyed with Phrygian dominant?