General Music Chat

Who cares about a b9 being forbidden in a composition. The musicians, who play with heart and soul with no rules as to why it is "forbidden" , have the edge.

Shoot, does that woman look good? Shoot, does that guitar sound great? Shoot does that song have some great FLOW.

Shoot, Most of the time when I listen to some new song posted here or somewhere else, the first question is all about heart and intent,,,,,


Music theory is so simple it is ridiculous. Music heart is so so complex it can never be explained.

Music theory, at it's root, is a communication tool. More often than not I have a particular sound in my head that I want to get across to another musician in my band.

When I tell the drummer, "I need a rat-tat-tat sort of thing here", he just looks at me like I'm out of my mind. I've communicated absolutely nothing to him. When I say I need quarter-note triplets for two measures on the snare, then he gets it.

When I tell the guitar player, "I need that melancholy sort of sound right here", it's meaningless to him. When I say I need a Gm down to an F#m, that means something to him.

It isn't about the "rules". It's about understanding how these things come together to make things happen and being able to communicate that to other musicians. Playing with emotion means knowing how to express the emotion in your playing. It often also means being able to express to other musicians how to express the emotion you're reaching for.

I played for over twenty years without having any knowledge in music theory. Up until two months ago I didn’t know what a B minor chord was. I played the combinations and different variations, but I just didn’t know it by name. It’s not intentional, I’m self taught so unless there was a need for me to know, then I wouldn’t. Most stuff I do by ear and visualization. That sound, looks like this key combination etc.

It’s intimidating. If you are already uncertain, having to admit ignorance instantly creates a focus on that person’s ability. I don’t have to know I’m playing an “A9”, to play a “A9”. To some folks, what you know is instantly confused, with what you can do. “Yeah that sounds great, but what are your credentials?” Run across that attitude enough times and denial is as good as any other excuse, to dismiss that assumption.

Being dyslexic, reading music is nothing short of sheer torture. The amount of practice it would take for me, far exceeds the necessity. I always associated that difficulty with music theory as well. It too, must be just as difficult. Whenever anything becomes even remotely mathematical, I immediately imagine complexity and drudgery. I’m probably not alone with that tendency. If I would have know that much of it simply makes sense, I would probably have tried learning the details years ago. I already knew many of the rules through experimentation and practice, just not what they were called. I simply didn’t know there would be a quiz, in order to enjoy creating music.

The leader of the band I’m in is really well educated and insists that I learn, for the sake of having a common vocabulary (as he put it). So I’m teaching him new technology MIDI recording, audio formats, editing, stuff like that, while he’s teaching me music theory. Where before with Mike and I it was: “It sounds like this”, now its: “play a C9” or “C6” ect. It’s not nearly as hard as I had originally imagined, once an explanation that made sense was given.

Well I’m still learning and that can’t be a bad thing.

Hey Phil that’s a little harsh no? By default then, any Juilliard music graduate must kick ass over Clapton, Hendrix and Gilmour, being much more legitimate? Tossing away musicians based on your criteria, would mean Eric Clapton is unworthy. Learning through playing by ear, hasn’t severely limited either his talent or his ability. I’m sure he knows music theory by now, but it’s just a good thing he didn’t have to submit a resume to join the Yardbirds. Hendrix another, who learned by listening to records and lot’s of practice and David Gilmour was self taught as well. Perhaps its lack of the cookie cutter mold, that gave them different perspectives in the first place?

Years ago a friend of mine was dating an artists. She had a little party, during which he showed the guests a picture he had made. They all admired the coloring and use of space. When he professed he knew nothing of art, suddenly the quality became questionable. Before, when it was presumed he knew what he was doing, it was considered a really good piece. Afterwards the picture became nothing but flawed garbage, with all sorts of fundamental mistakes. Perception is everything. If a musician can convince the audience, does it really matter where they’ve been?

Music theory, at it's root, is a communication tool. More often than not I have a particular sound in my head that I want to get across to another musician in my band.

When I tell the drummer, "I need a rat-tat-tat sort of thing here", he just looks at me like I'm out of my mind. I've communicated absolutely nothing to him. When I say I need quarter-note triplets for two measures on the snare, then he gets it.

When I tell the guitar player, "I need that melancholy sort of sound right here", it's meaningless to him. When I say I need a Gm down to an F#m, that means something to him.

It isn't about the "rules". It's about understanding how these things come together to make things happen and being able to communicate that to other musicians. Playing with emotion means knowing how to express the emotion in your playing. It often also means being able to express to other musicians how to express the emotion you're reaching for.

Great point. Having at least a minimal understanding of theory can make the communications easier. I'm glad I took theory in HS and study piano for a year. I remember going to the teacher once asking about some chords and she explained that what I was playing was called a passage. It opened my eyes to a better understanding of how some things are written or created. It works for me.

Music theory, at it's root, is a communication tool. More often than not I have a particular sound in my head that I want to get across to another musician in my band.

When I tell the drummer, "I need a rat-tat-tat sort of thing here", he just looks at me like I'm out of my mind. I've communicated absolutely nothing to him. When I say I need quarter-note triplets for two measures on the snare, then he gets it.

When I tell the guitar player, "I need that melancholy sort of sound right here", it's meaningless to him. When I say I need a Gm down to an F#m, that means something to him.

It isn't about the "rules". It's about understanding how these things come together to make things happen and being able to communicate that to other musicians. Playing with emotion means knowing how to express the emotion in your playing. It often also means being able to express to other musicians how to express the emotion you're reaching for.

Very well put, Aiki

Couldn't have said it better myself. so, now I don't have to. Some of what they're saying carries a lot of weight though. on the other hand, I have Adult attention disorder. That doesn't mean I can't function, it does make it harder to study things like theory.

In the 80's I kind of got turned off from studying theory because everybody I met, who had, all sounded alike. So, beyond some classes in elementary school, I didn't take it any farther until the 90's when extended guitar solos fell out of fashion. It was short-lived though, because I discovered that I had already learned most of what the teacher was assigning me from a book, on my own. So, what did I need HIM for? Especially if I already bought the book? A person who is self-taught in anything is called an autodidact. Frank Zappa was mostly self-taught in many instruments. Other autodidacts include; David Bowie, Leonardo da Vinci, Arnold Schoenberg, Danny Elfman, James Cameron, Steven Spielberg, Quentin Tarantino, Robert Rodriguez, Stanley Kubrick, Woody Allen, Steven Soderbergh, Orson Welles, Craig Ferguson, Buckminster Fuller, Frank Lloyd Wright, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Edison, and the Wright Brothers.

Honestly, there is no right or wrong way to play music any more than a right or wrong way to speak. It is the context which makes a difference. Often, what works wonderfully in one context is a miserable failure in another. I haven't met anybody from GIT who could play the blues worth a damn. On the flipside, Leadbelly couldn't play Eruption by Van Halen.

While what I know about the "theory" side of music has fallen into disuse over the years I am picking it back up to more effectively communicate with other bandmates. However, sticking to theory always felt too limiting to me, like coloring inside the lines. I always had difficulty visualizing music as standard notation. I always related better to John Cage's method of composing, with abstract shapes and lines. Somehow, I envision the sounds like a multi-color oscilloscope. But, that isn't very practical to communicate within a band. Percussive instruments at least made SOME sense to me in that way. So I write standard notation like it is for piano or drums. Graphic notation is for personal use. But, sometimes a tape recorder is preferrable.

Theory is used in good music, whether the musician actually knows it or not. The difference between an A major and minor is one note, but this makes a big difference when the wrong one is used. When I hear a composition with "incorrect" chords I think less of the music, and also the musician. But you don't need a lot of formal training, all the tools are available now more than ever.

Even the most rudimentory blues musician knows some amount of theory, whether he knows it or not.

"BB, play me a 1,4,5 in G. Bring it down from the 5th. On 4, a-1! a-2! a-3!"

I studied some theory at the very begining but forgot most of it. Five or six years ago I picked it up again, finding that the available resources for that have expanded exponentially.

You want to know what the devil's tritone is or how to do a harmonic scale - google can tell you.

But for some reason - that is what made me switch from 5 string bass to six string guitar. More room to play around with scales?

I highly recommend it - While I can't sight read except very slowly and its because I don't know how to write the 'feel' down - but I have learned a great deal and love it.

Talbot

Music theory and/or scale theory has gotten such a bad rap with many of the current bunch of talented players? They respond with remarks such as, I play with emotion, I'm not concerned with technical abilities, I don't want to know any theory.

Did Mozart, Stephen Foster, Ira Gershwin, Frank Zappa, Alan Parsons, Jeff Lynne etc...... and the list goes on and on, not play with emotion?

I don't think theory is about technical ability, or how fast you can play a scale. There's only seven notes and theory relates these notes, no matter who wrote it or how fast it's played.

I've studied theory because it's another way to increase my musical ability and enjoyment of music.

Before Edison invented a recording device, there was only one way to precisely preserve your music for future generations, standard notation.
( OK it could be handed down thru word of mouth by not very precise)
Theory relates the notes as they've been notated, and musical geniuses have always broke these rules to create beautiful music ( as writers have done with language).

I just don't get somebody not wanting to know more, about something that is so close to there heart and soul?

I pondered this question all dam day dangit!!! Theory is a necessary evil. I swear to goodness I hate it but it has opened many doors for me. I am not the best when it comes to theory but it has empowered me. I use pretty much everything I permitted myself to learn. I was able to work as an instructional assistant because of music theory. I learned to tune violins because I can identify perfect fifths wneh I hear them. I have more to offer my private students. For example, if they are playing a piece of music with, what may seem to be, impossible runs I make them identify what they are actually reading which almost always turns out to be a simple everyday scale. An E major scale beginning on B and ending on B ( mixolydian mode ) is till the E major scale.The more I can offer them, the more students I get and the more money I make. Music theory has carried me from classical to jazz to rock music with considerable ease. I can't compose like a Beethoven cevant...but I can compose. Listen to a Bobby Mcferrin CD...you'll hear him sing music of the Beatles, Dave Bruebeck, Mozart and African Folk songs. Without a doubt, he excels in theory. Theory is a tool box that contains tools necessary for the trade. If I were a carpenter, I would probably hate cutting wood to build cabinets or tables but being able to build cabinets and tables would probably be a blast. I can't get to building if I don't first get to cutting...can cut without the rite tools.

Yeah, I hate theory...absolutely hate it But without it I would not have been able to realize my own personal passion and creativity known as music.

Allow me to clarify my statement, lalong. I cam certainly understand ppl with learning disabilities. I can understand ppl who simply haven't even taken the time to learn. Hell...I'm one of them!

What pisses me off are the ppl who are proud of their ignorance. I avoid them.

There is a shitload of stuff I havent' learned. In some cases, I feel like I SHOULD have learned the stuff, & I'm actually a lil ashamed that I haven't. I would never brag about being uninformed like it's a good thing. Imho - it's never a good thing.

When I hear ppl damning the "colege boy," like education is something to be ashamed of, I find them to be rather icky folk who A) have little to nothing of value to offer me & the world at large, & B) they are usually stupid, & C) their penchant to remain ignorant means that they don't want to improve, so why should I even bother with them

I am far, far from a music wizard, & when I meet up with ppl who are better than I, I try to learn from them. I expect nothing less from those I associate with, whether it's in music or not.

Take this quote from Karl Rove - "As perople do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing." That tells me that he thinks that ignorance is preferable, at least in OTHER ppl, like the voting citizenry. I think he's an idiot, or that he's educated himself, & wants others to be less so, so that they can be more easily manipulated. I hate him for that, whatever his reasons for making the statement. He's obviously an asshole that I don't need to associate with. I also think he is a very poor representative of the Rep mind, & that he is the absolute opposite of a conservative, not to mention a very bad American, & a poor excuse for a human being. Too much education is a bad thing - yeah, only if one has educated himself in wrong thinking, as ol' Karl seems to have done to himself.

What pisses me off are the ppl who are proud of their ignorance. I avoid them.

.

Here here

What pisses me off is people whom think education alone is what makes them intelligent.


Avoid them too.


A dumbass with a master's degree is just an educated dumbass.

Meh, I let my final products speak for me.