And, of course, the inevitable response that there is SO MUCH F*CKING MORE TO THEORY THAN CLASSICAL COMPOSITION.
Jeebus.
So why DO people get so emotional about music theory topics?
-
- KVRist
- 257 posts since 5 Jul, 2004 from Gaithersburg, MD
how about adding the option:
-making music is easier with a knowledge of theory because those 'happy accidents' that 'instinct' musicians rely on occur more frequently, are understood when they do, and can afterwords be more easily replicated/communicated.
-making music is easier with a knowledge of theory because those 'happy accidents' that 'instinct' musicians rely on occur more frequently, are understood when they do, and can afterwords be more easily replicated/communicated.
-
- KVRist
- 379 posts since 21 Nov, 2005
That would be my vote.agincourtdb wrote:how about adding the option:
-making music is easier with a knowledge of theory because those 'happy accidents' that 'instinct' musicians rely on occur more frequently, are understood when they do, and can afterwords be more easily replicated/communicated.
-
- KVRian
- 903 posts since 14 May, 2003
Ignorance is bliss until someone asks a question, then the spell is broken.
-
- KVRAF
- 1643 posts since 18 Mar, 2004 from Lincoln, CA
Read my reply to Barf (a few posts underneath yours). It probably answered your questions.shinken wrote: OK, I have a question for you. According to your own theory quoted above, are you one of those who lacks the brainpower to learn "music theory", or do you also happen to know my own theory of music?
You are a devotee, nothing more. Learning classical music theory doesn't make you a beacon of wisdom and civilisation (maybe it would if you moved to Slough LOL), and in the absence of any link to your music you're definitely a pure theorist and a non-musician.
And why do you say there's no link to my music? Look closer--my website is listed just like everyone else who has a website listed in their profiles. Where's YOURS?
-
- KVRist
- 154 posts since 1 Dec, 2005
I'm not making any case for music theory so you don't need to hear my music (which if you're so heavily reliant on others' tired old music theory tricks would almost certainly lie outside your safety zone anyway, so I don't think you would understand it). If I get the time I'll listen to your stuff - and considering what you've been saying then it had better be good, to live up to all your hype. If it's all boring soundscapes and stringy pads I'm going to be disappointed but not very surprised.Lunatique wrote:Read my reply to Barf (a few posts underneath yours). It probably answered your questions.shinken wrote: OK, I have a question for you. According to your own theory quoted above, are you one of those who lacks the brainpower to learn "music theory", or do you also happen to know my own theory of music?
You are a devotee, nothing more. Learning classical music theory doesn't make you a beacon of wisdom and civilisation (maybe it would if you moved to Slough LOL), and in the absence of any link to your music you're definitely a pure theorist and a non-musician.
And why do you say there's no link to my music? Look closer--my website is listed just like everyone else who has a website listed in their profiles. Where's YOURS?
Hehe
I just visited your website and on the front page:You're so full of yourself Mr Chang. I got 94.4% on the same test. What have you got to say to that? And don't you know that if you're doing "serious" music then you're supposed to let the music speak for itself? Perhaps you should go on Pop Idol if you think your own persona might be a useful crutch for your music.I scored high (91.7, if I remember correctly), and that's no surprise since I'm a musician/composer.
Edit: I went to your website but when choosing which stuff to listen/download I got utterly sick of reading your lame sci-fi bollocks about whores and futuristic elevator shafts and drinking Vitamin-B, and so now I can't be bothered to waste time listening to your stuff. Ever heard of good taste, modesty and reserve? I'm unimpressed and this conversation is concluded.
-
- KVRAF
- 1894 posts since 19 Apr, 2006 from Montreal, Canada
Because it's flawed and highly subject to interpretation. There's another subject that's also flawed and highly subject to interpretation, it's called religion; look how people get emotional about THAT.herodotus wrote:So why DO people get so emotional about music theory topics?
-
- KVRAF
- 1906 posts since 5 Feb, 2005 from UK - Stafford/Lancaster (uni)
just....
Gotta love KVR.
mmmmmmm, must dash....foods ready
Last edited by WoJ on Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 1894 posts since 19 Apr, 2006 from Montreal, Canada
Went to his site too, like you I never got to his music; unlike you it's because I got stuck on the photos of his beautifull wifeshinken wrote: Edit: I went to your website but when choosing which stuff to listen/download I got utterly sick of reading your lame sci-fi bollocks about whores and futuristic elevator shafts and drinking Vitamin-B, and so now I can't be bothered to waste time listening to your stuff. Ever heard of good taste, modesty and reserve? I'm unimpressed and this conversation is concluded.
-
- KVRist
- 154 posts since 1 Dec, 2005
No I noticed the vids, but they just reinforced my opinion that he's too full of his own egotistical self to even consider that visitors might visit him for music's own sake. I did actually listen to his clip "What you don't know", but it just seemed like a scales exercise for Grade 3 piano, with harmonic fudge from string accompaniment. I could reproduce it inside a tracker, without any difficulty. But it says absolutely nothing musically (emotionally barren) and that's why he needs to use his wife's looks and his oh-look-at-me-I'm-so-funky sci-fi stories. He's no Takeshi Kitano that's for sure! Good luck to him and hope he finds the winning formula one day.
-
- KVRAF
- 4669 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from U.A.E
everybody...(page 3 hugtime) 
also the track "What you dont know - unfinished" on lunatiques site would be amazing with added an organ shuffle.
also the track "What you dont know - unfinished" on lunatiques site would be amazing with added an organ shuffle.
-
- KVRAF
- 2217 posts since 15 Jul, 2003
differnt people have different skill sets
some people can do a great deal by ear and others (like me) are woeful by ear
(though som esay the ear can be trained)
if one had a gifted ear and had a history of doing well by ear, it would take a pretty good argument or experience of some depth for them to have a reason to change their approach.
change is painful and generates emotional repsonse
otoh, some people need the 'support' of theory to get anything done at all.
i think at a certain level, a certain common language is required for musicians to communicate with each other -- hence the Nashville system and more traditional systems. I think a lot of people (musicians and non-musicians) would be surprised by how much so-called 'theory' work occurs in production studios by musicians that one would not assume were skilled or schooled in 'theory' -- from your pop princesses to your hard-core metalists.
when a friend taught me to sail a little Sunfish he just taught me things he figured out on his own. I went and bought a book on 'theory' -- doesn't negate any of what he figured out. It's just a differnt approach, but if someone tells him to point up higher or back the sheet, he may know what to do -- but not what it's called. Still I can't see him getting emotional about it.
some people can do a great deal by ear and others (like me) are woeful by ear
(though som esay the ear can be trained)
if one had a gifted ear and had a history of doing well by ear, it would take a pretty good argument or experience of some depth for them to have a reason to change their approach.
change is painful and generates emotional repsonse
otoh, some people need the 'support' of theory to get anything done at all.
i think at a certain level, a certain common language is required for musicians to communicate with each other -- hence the Nashville system and more traditional systems. I think a lot of people (musicians and non-musicians) would be surprised by how much so-called 'theory' work occurs in production studios by musicians that one would not assume were skilled or schooled in 'theory' -- from your pop princesses to your hard-core metalists.
when a friend taught me to sail a little Sunfish he just taught me things he figured out on his own. I went and bought a book on 'theory' -- doesn't negate any of what he figured out. It's just a differnt approach, but if someone tells him to point up higher or back the sheet, he may know what to do -- but not what it's called. Still I can't see him getting emotional about it.
-
- KVRist
- 445 posts since 24 Apr, 2005
Music Theory is kind of like musical lego. It's this stupidly fun toy that you can build almost anything out of and never get bored of playing with. I love having learned music theory. I think it's made me a better musician. It's really fun to experiment with. Sometimes I spend 12 hour days just messing around with all the stupid places modes or counterpoint can take you.
It's just one of those things where the more you put into it, the more you get out of it. I think alot of musicians who learn theory just want everyone else to go through the same paradigm shift that they did, and appreciate music on a different level because of it. Maybe they just get a little frustrated when they see someone talking badly about a process that's been very personal and inspiring to them.
On the other side of the coin, there's always a bit of resentment for people who have had more oppertunities to learn about theory, and the pride that comes with learning and figuring out things for yourself. I know that I sometimes feel frustrated that there are people who have been playing music for their entire lives, and know it on an intuitive level, whereas I started comparatively late. It's a source of frustration, because I always wonder what my abilities would have been like if I had started like that, and it's a source of pride, because my skills are finally starting to build to a comparable level. So of course, I get a bit emotional when people discuss learning music from childhood as being integral to having talent.
Anyways, I just want to say that the important part is that people are making music and struggling to get out what's inside their head. How they make it doesn't matter, as long as they're being honest to themselves. Maybe 3 chord punk might not be my cup of tea, but if the bastard making it has made the kind of music he loves, then I respect that.
It's just one of those things where the more you put into it, the more you get out of it. I think alot of musicians who learn theory just want everyone else to go through the same paradigm shift that they did, and appreciate music on a different level because of it. Maybe they just get a little frustrated when they see someone talking badly about a process that's been very personal and inspiring to them.
On the other side of the coin, there's always a bit of resentment for people who have had more oppertunities to learn about theory, and the pride that comes with learning and figuring out things for yourself. I know that I sometimes feel frustrated that there are people who have been playing music for their entire lives, and know it on an intuitive level, whereas I started comparatively late. It's a source of frustration, because I always wonder what my abilities would have been like if I had started like that, and it's a source of pride, because my skills are finally starting to build to a comparable level. So of course, I get a bit emotional when people discuss learning music from childhood as being integral to having talent.
Anyways, I just want to say that the important part is that people are making music and struggling to get out what's inside their head. How they make it doesn't matter, as long as they're being honest to themselves. Maybe 3 chord punk might not be my cup of tea, but if the bastard making it has made the kind of music he loves, then I respect that.
-
Lord Snarebottom Lord Snarebottom https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=83257
- Banned
- 456 posts since 4 Oct, 2005
Nonsense IMHO. Perhaps it is easier for you, but for me, I need no theory. You might need it to figure out or describe what I did, but I certainly don't need it to write complex and beautiful music. For that I only need my mind and my ears.agincourtdb wrote:how about adding the option:
-making music is easier with a knowledge of theory because those 'happy accidents' that 'instinct' musicians rely on occur more frequently, are understood when they do, and can afterwords (sic) be more easily replicated/communicated.
But, for the majority of folks, this may be true.
