Music Theory helps playing

[Cheez]

Oh, want to add. Many of us here may consider ourselves "gifted". I guess people like Jimi and Tommy (and Hans Zimmer - who also claims to have no musical training background) are the gifted of the gifted - the top 0.5% of so. If we belong to that category, I guess we would be busy producing our 100th album and not be discussing this topic in SOFT!

 

[jullian_bei]

long time ago I read from a famous guitarist (really can't remember where and who) that music theory is a tool to flashback and explain a composition.

for example we get one lick in our mind, with music theory we can quickly develop a musical idea and not let it abandoned just because we can't technically continue on how to play the idea. we also will not mix one idea to another idea .

Late Beethoven, he is deaf but still able to compose the infamous 9th Symphony.

 

[pf]

I think music is all about tension and resolution. With appropriate tension and resolution in a song, the song will sound nice...in the sense that it is acceptable by the general public's ears.

And music theory is a tried and proven formula for creating/grouping those tension and resolution and by applying appropriately, the song will sound nice.

But it doesn't mean that one has got to know music theory to create a song that sounds nice. I don't mean that the song created would go out of the formula. Rather, the musician who knows no theory would be applying the formula as he/she has heard others did. Because it will sound nice to him/her.

So, knowing music theory helps to speed up the process of making nice sounding music because one would know the formula that works. If not, it just takes a longer time (for us earthlings, as Cheez said) to experiment to find out what works and what don't.

However, I don't think any musician should rely solely on music theory that was taught/learnt to play music. Because that is just one way of taking on information and processing it to commit it to memory and apply it the next time one's creating music. There's a chance that with less usage, one may forget the formula to apply and end up sounding the same all the time (applying same few principles over and over again). One may also not be too creative in applying the theory learnt (applying the same few principles in limited ways over and over again), leading to the same result, i.e. no breakthrough, nothing new.

Besides relying on music theory that one already know, a musician should also explore listening to others play music (this is another way to take in information and commit to memory) and experimenting. Because something might sound nice but it was never taught/learnt before.

E.g. Tension and resolution in music can be created via several ways, example:
1. fast vs slow
2. dominant vs tonic chord
3. loud vs soft

The integration (or interaction) of what is played and how it is played is crucial to whether the song will sound nice or not (not just what is played). Music theory is limited in this sense as in it cannot communicate this. It communicates just what to play. The how to do it depends on the musician's application of theory and touch.

Like Bill Evans. He did a post grad studies in composition. He should know all the theory out there. And I suppose he was also very gifted as well. He was able to think out of the box and create music with dissonent sounds that sounds right but when others do may sound wrong. Thats the Harmony of Bill Evans that music students study today. If he were to be restricted by his own knowledge, he wouldn't have the same achievements.

Above are just my own thoughts. Not sure if you guys agree or not.

 

[159]

Seriously, what is music theory?

Sorry, don't mind but I'm really new. I don't even know how to use a pedal. Never really touched one before too.

 

[ajim.theorb]

in the words of mark twain, never let formal education get in the way of your learning. you can always learn music theory to get the basics. from then on develop your own style. you dont have to be so strict and anal about it. its no wonder many musicians drop out of music sch just to be soo damn success-full.

 

[Godspeed64]

never let formal education get in the way of your learning.

True! Think of theory as a stepping stone, not a box to confine yourself in..
I believe what I know is the bare minimum of theory, but that's enough for me.. I'm afraid learning more will only make me more particular about being "right", instead of being MUSICAL, which is the true objective of music!

 

[shinobi]

i just replied in a similar thread in the guitar forum with an analogy

you don't have to know music theory in order to play music

just like you don't have to know how to read and write english to speak english

you can memorise words of a language, and memorise sequences of them to speak sentences (and that's how most of us play music)

but without some grammar, you can't claim to know how to speak the language

learning music theory may be optional. but many learn it anyway out of their passion for music

 

[visa]

you can learn to play music by ear through trial and error- after a while, you get a sense of what works and what doesn't.

music theory simply explains to you why it is that way.

 

[Cheez]

Sounds like a lot of misconceptions surround music theory. Firstly, music theory is not basic. Yes, there are basic theory, but it goes into intermediate and advanced levels. The theory I learned only scratches the surface (wished I had done more theory when I was younger - now time limits me). Secondly, as I said before, theory doesn't box anybody in or limits any creativity. If anything, it expands it, not limit.

Take the example of English (I like that analogy - since music is also a language) - not knowing grammar or syntax simply means a person can speak in a minimal conversational manner. Deep conversation or discussions will be difficult for that person. Writing essays will be a problem. People will have trouble understanding what that person is saying or writing. And it will be impossible for that person to be discussing this topic in SOFT - since he can't write or read!

Thirdly, music theory is not about reading notes. Reading notes is one part of theory - maybe 0.001%. It's almost nothing.

Since most here are guitarists and few pianists/keyboardists, I'll give one simple example for theory applied to guitar. If you know harmony, you would have heard that we should never "double the 3rd note of a chord". Now, that may sound restrictive. But it's there for a very good reason. As what pf pointed out earlier, a lot of theory is about tension and resolution. A note within a chord need to resolve correctly. Doubling a third many times causes problems in resolution and may result in voicing problems (which would be too cheem to put down here). That's not to say I never double the 3rd. I do that when I arrange and write for a full orchestra when many instruments are used. But when I play the guitar (particularly when I pluck), oftentimes I would avoid doubling the 3rd note, particularly when it's the first inversion (ie bass note is the 3rd note). So for a C/E chord, I would make sure there is no E in the rest of the chord (taking extra care of the string 1, open string is E). The voicings changes and the effect is pretty different, particularly when chords are moving and the melodic lines are moving.

This is one tiny bit of theory applied. It enhances how the music sound. Does it limit? In a sense, but for a very good reason. Can I/do I break the rule? Yes, I do sometimes. Also for certain reasons.

 

[ShredCow]

Theory is a tool.

It is up to the user to utilise the tool.

I think its a brash statement to say theory limits because... it is only the musician that is limited. After all, the person makes the music, right?

Theory helped me a lot when I picked up the guitar - I was able to grasp the concept of chords and harmony much more easily due to the knowledge I had. I regret not spending more time learning theory, I wish I had branched outside of classical music and taken a look into the mechanics of other music forms like Jazz. Its always fascinating to learn about the "why did he play that?", even though sometimes it might not make theory-sense.

That said, I enjoyed reading thru the thread. Its always good to breath in the advice & words of more knowledgeable people... also very refreshing to see certain things articulated in a manner that I could never have said so myself.

 

[tim098]

Cheez I think that was an excellent post and explanation on a hint of what theory is. I only feel that theory has to capacity to restrict.

Eg: a friend plays in the key of C and whenever he does a little lick at the end of say four bars, he will play something that is only in the key of C and disregard how it sounds. Ok this is what I am hearing myself not what he told me, but basically thats the gist of it. Usually its a 'pentatonic' (sp?) scale at the end or sth. And Im like "why not just play sth that sounds awesome instead of mathematically figuring out what to play?"

Technically speaking it is fine, but sound wise, it could be much much better. And this person is average in guitar theory. (is this the same as the piano abrsm kind of theory btw?)

Not that theory is evil or that it restricts. It expands DEFINITELY but I think if overused (for the lack of a better word) it can restrict

 

[pf]

tim098, the notes of the scale can sound awesome. Your friend just need to put in effort to find the combi to sound awesome rather than alright. However, if he goes out of the scale, without knowing what he's doing, it might sound awful (unacceptable to the general public's ears) instead.

Btw, music theory generally means Western Classical music theory. Applies to all instruments.

Your friend can also choose a different scale to play in the key of C, e.g. the blue scale. The blue scales is not governed by western classical music theory. However, its governed by jazz theory.

Yeah, so one cannot escape theory. Coz theory is man made. It is a so called tried and tested formula. It is made to explain how certain tensions go with certain resolutions. What western classical music theory cannot explain, another set of theory comes in to do the job.

 

[ShredCow]

Anything can sound under-whelming aye? Take some overused blues lick... it can sound so overdone... so repetitive... so blah! But the same notes in the hands of another player - suddenly the thing springs alive! Now it sings, it bites, it bleeds into your heart!

Its not about the notes. Notes are well, just notes! How you play them is what makes it exciting.

I suppose your friend, tim098, is a guitarist? There are plenty of techniques and gear to help make a tired phrase sound more alive. Change the rhythm, alter the picking dynamics, finger vibrato, bending, sustaining, staccato-ing... then there's the use of whammy bars, wah pedals, dirt pedals, feedback, this and that and this and that... Finally, above and over everything... the heart & soul of the player.

 

[plect]

so enlightening to see many perspectives here.. (love the analogies XD )

Btw it's all depends on what genre on music u wanna explore / focus on..
if it's only for playing pop (guitar pop or piano pop) u can see it this way imo gr3 ABRSM would certainly suffice for most pop songs
no offence..

tension and resolution is just a part of harmonisation, no doubt it's important

ABRSM and most theory music would be referring to western classical
(if you go deep-- yup hit has diff levels, fr v basic, like reading notes, figuring out beats/rhythms, to indefinite hahas..)
it incorporates a lot of history of classical music (fr renaissance period till 20th century)
you'll also learn melody writing/ composition, harmonisation, instrumentation, forms, etc (the proper conventional way).
true, there's also sections on how diff composers explore (ie the unconventional way), it's good to learn n know some but again its generally for ur knowledge only..

It's true also there is some differences one could find in learning traditional music and modern,
asian vs western but many of western ones can be applied..
Its just matter of diff instruments, style, effects, moods that one has to be aware

rmbr this is just theory..
some lucky and talented ones may be able to learn UNAWARINGLY along the way
But best if you learn proper theory then experiment with it, it's real fun (ie. you know what you're doing lol)
& its all depends on you, the player or rather musicians to apply and explore or even modify it(go out of box and breaking the rules)
But when one think out of the box, it's not always succesful, hence many ppl are following it rather strictly
you can see it this way.. theory is just knowledge, there's no restriction on how u can use it..
overuse? ok la what to do.. many ppl just happend to use it many times.. and it still doesnt restrict you, unless you restrict yourselves

jazz has its own scales and rules too (just as sb else mentioned alrd)
you most probably have to take separate lessons in jazz music playing since as far as i know jazz would only be covered if later stage of music theory
(nonetheless a classical background would be anadvantage)
and most importantly you won't need it, imo cos jazz juz need knowledge of jazz scales / harmony and lots and lots of experimentation
(experience is definitely of significance)

and do not mixed music theory with techniques & style or playing music itself:mrgreen:
Of course you'll learn these in theory of music, but music theory is not all those..


one interesting fact i can deduce fr learning music theory all this while is that
music theory wasnt invented deliberately..
it's all by exploration of sound / style and hard work of musicians of late age ( so, yup u can dun learn and experiment with music and eventually get it)
in fact it was studied by music enthusiasts from past composers and their works
generally many composers know what they have in mind but never publicised or wrote down their theory of music (except a few contemporary / modern ones)


Being deaf or mute or blind doesnt restrict one's ability to play or compose music, lol
beethoven has superb theory music background btw..
see this web haha
http://www.lvbeethoven.com/Bio/BiographyMusicMasters.html
and he further contribute to development of music theory

imo many successful entertaniners / (generally pop) music players out there may be out of sch..likely becos they alrd found their style
and can't be bothered to learn heaps of historical info..

SO knowing music theory does not guarantee u can play music but it definitely helps and gives u a good foundation for your music endeavor

these are my notion of music theory..
Hope i have clarify 1 or 2 things here..
feel free to discuss further..

 

[evident]

definitely...

with music theory it gives you the ability to analyze other peoples' musicand able to build on what other people play and add it to your own style..

music theory is the difference between rock and jazz..

 

[incognito030]

definitely...

music theory is the difference between rock and jazz..

huh?

 

[gutturalpiss]

someone is trying to say that rock musicians are less inclined to be apt theoretically than jazz musicians

 

[djasli]

Theory is part of a musicians' tools; just like the way you pick, your gear, etc.

Why not use every tools in your arsenal? The more tools@your disposal, the more choices you'd have. And more easier it will get with your music playing.

Learn anything and everything you can. Even if it's boring or you think you'd not need that particular tool. You never know.

 

[teleplayer]

I do agree that music theory do helps in your playing. Music theory plays a big part in those classical instruments and maybe some rock instruments. But I don't know why people always thinks that having a grade or certificate means you are good or what. And when you don't have the grade or paper with ink on it, you are a "noob". Does this grade really means so much in music?

 

[hifi_killer]

i feel that too much music theory will cripple your hearing and feel. One might tend to think of notes in a mathematical way instead of paying attention to how it sounds like.
IMO, hearing ability > music theory