So why DO people get so emotional about music theory topics?

[Hink]

i think some of it has to do with the investment factor. many have invested alot of time into learning it, so it HAS to be worth it! Just like those who spend tons of money on the highest quality gear, and diss plugins or DAWs, because of the investment they put into it.

True.

The counter to that is that, until you HAVE invested a lot of time in it, it won't really seem practical... so those who have invested the most time in it also have the best experience with it and how it works.

I know everyone hates analogies, but it's like anything else in musicl it takes time.

"You only think the piano is a more dynamic and expressive instrument than the Glockenspiel because you spent 15 years studying it. You've invested in it, and you have to convince yourself that it's worthwhile."

"No, it opens up a range of dynamic and timbral control, not to mention sheer range of pitches, that the Glockenspiel doesn't provide. Plus, it helps your musicality to see things from another perspective, especially since so much of music and technology is explained and designed with the piano in mind"

"That's crap, there are plenty of good songs you can play on Glockenspiel. I took a piano class and I couldn't do half of anything that I could on a glockenspiel... the key weights made my notes slower and everything was all elevated and confusing. It just slows me down."

"Again, if you would take the time to actually LEARN it properly your opinion might change"

"You're just full of yourself because you think that piano is a more "legitimate" instrument, different strokes for different folks! My music wouldn't get better from learning anything about piano, you're wasting everyone's time."

"My God you're retarded."

"And now you start flaming, well you misspelled that word back in post 4 and your feet smell and you lack people skills and you just make theory look bad, ner ner ner ner "

I have invested many years in theory and I promise my music has done nothing but improve. On top of that, it's opened my eyes and my mind to musical styles and characteristics I'd have never even HEARD of before. If I approached myself from 4 years ago and said "write a song in 7/8" or "Use a Neapolitan 6th" I'd have laughed and shown myself to the door. But having studied the applications and uses of these concepts I find myself working them into my music and appreciating more music that incorporates them and other once "ugly" musical aspects.

thanx for proving my point

[Toxikator]

Look, I know people for whom nothing is ever good enough, and neither they nor those around them are all that happy. Not everyone need buy into the idea that there's always more to know and we simply should know it because it exists. I think this is where the emotional responses to music theory come from.

Those kinds of people are the ones who would rather NOT take on the impossible challenge, because they see it as a waste.

I'm not trying to make this into an invalid perspective.

I'm just saying that I get the feeling these people don't understand WHY there are those of us who would spend every minute of every day trying to reach something that could never be reached.

For me, it's about the journey. One of the greatest things ABOUT music is the fact that it will constantly engage you. Unlike most things, which you can master and drop, music is one of a few that ALWAYS offers knowledge that you don't yet have. There is always more ground to cover and more information to gather. It's creatively AND intellectually stimulating, and one feeds off of the other.

[Toxikator]

thanx for proving my point

I'm not trying to make myself look better than him; If I did I wouldn't get involved in NEARLY as many losing battles on KvR as I do

But I do take offense to the idea that the only reason I value the study of Music Theory is I don't want to feel like I've wasted my time...

[talynidm]

i think some of it has to do with the investment factor. many have invested alot of time into learning it, so it HAS to be worth it! Just like those who spend tons of money on the highest quality gear, and diss plugins or DAWs, because of the investment they put into it.

No it doesn't. It doesn't have to be worth anything. That's like saying, I've invested alot of time doing nothing, so wasting my time doing nothing has to be worth it.




I don't care how much time I invest in it, because I enjoy it. It's only worth what you derive from it, and if it helps you construct something you like to listen to.

I wasn't a music major in college, but I did study with a classical guitarist for a couple of years, he was sort of a mentor, and he was the type of person that insisted, if you use a pick and play jazz, that you weren't worth crap. I also met professors who tried to impress me with chord structure and automatic recall, when you can just look at the fret board, or piano keyboard and SEE what freeking AMaj7 looks like.

I mean snobs, who are to involved in a certain way of learning, when there are multiple ways to look at theory and arive at the same conclusions.

It's called rigid thinking, and that is not really that healthy, actually it's a sign of mental illness sometimes.

A good teacher can adapt teaching methods to teach a person in such a way that best accomodates their learning skills.

If your goal is to write a certain type of music, then yes, you have to have the knowledge of how to structure it.

I mean their are people who want to write in a certain "Format", and you have to learn it to be able to do it.

It's like saying you don't have to learn addition to use algebra.

However just because you have learned certain "styles" or "structures" of composition doesn' mean you are somehow creatively destroyed, if you are learning a certain structure to write a certain type of music, and can't do anything else, then you never could to begin with.

Here is just a basic example, and it's not a certain structure or style of music:

I mean if you get together with another musician and they can't even play in key, WTF is the point. It's just a waste of time, and no that's not being snobby, it's just that it takes a billion times longer to get anything done, and it is RANDOM luck that the person who can't play in key actually does something that sounds halfway decent. Sorry I have just wasted my time with too many people who have "SAID" they could play an instrument, when really all they had, WAS an instrument.

I mean if I wanted to record a Blues Album why would I work with someone who didn't know the minor pentatonic scale, I mean, what is the point? It just takes SO LONG and nothing gets done.

I mean I understand some ELITE snobbery(word?), but it is also extremely frustrating to work with people who want to write or play a certain type of music, and insist they can do it without the knowledge to speed the process up.

That situation always ends up the same,"Dude just play all the white keys".

[eduardo_b]

I have invested many years in theory and I promise my music has done nothing but improve.

Well, this might also be what is known in logic as a post hoc fallacy -- "because of this, therefore that." Which is to say, you assume that improvements in your music are because of your knowledge of music theory, but that's only an assumption on the basis of what seems an obvious connection. The problem with the assumption is that it isn't true for those who don't know music theory but have also experienced growth in their music skills. You might argue that their growth would have been greater with the knowledge you have, but there's simply no proof of this.

On top of that, it's opened my eyes and my mind to musical styles and characteristics I'd have never even HEARD of before.

While this may have been true for you, not everyone would necessarily appreciate these other musical styles. It's probably more true that you simply have a greater openness to a wider variety of music styles than many do, so music theory was a door to a greater variety for you than might have existed otherwise. It doesn't really prove the value of music theory in general for everyone, however.

I do think you make a wonderful ambassador, if you will, for the values of music theory for those who might be interested.

[Toxikator]

But of course the guitarist you just told to take a hike would have a view of you as an elitist douche...

Off the subject entirely I notice you mention the blues, any good resources? I'm having a hardtime with the bitonality of it and when the crushed major is appropriate vs. the pentatonic minor with the blue note.

[Toxikator]

Well, this might also be what is known in logic as a post hoc fallacy -- "because of this, therefore that." Which is to say, you assume that improvements in your music are because of your knowledge of music theory, but that's only an assumption on the basis of what seems an obvious connection.

I don't mean to imply that it was the ONLY reason, but I can assure that it was A reason. It wasn't until I started studying polyrhythms in earnest that I even began to UNDERSTAND, much less appreciate, bands like Meshuggah. In that sense Music Theory really DID open me up to it.

[Hink]

thanx for proving my point

I'm not trying to make myself look better than him; If I did I wouldn't get involved in NEARLY as many losing battles on KvR as I do

But I do take offense to the idea that the only reason I value the study of Music Theory is I don't want to feel like I've wasted my time...

I don't think that's true either, I think it's true that you study theory because you have a strong interest in it and it works for you. But in the other thread

I agreed with you up to this point. I have to dissent here, I would argue that the relevance is the end result, not the process of creation. And, while it's another (very interesting) discussion about your perspective on art (here, modern v. postmodern) and music, it also doesn't necessarily affect this thread. I just wanted to make clear that you don't speak for all of us w/ that one.

which you should realize is a two way street...but again this thread is about why some people get emotional and you are a stunning example of my point...I'm not saying you're trying be better...I'm saying that every post you make seems to be about what you know...try listening and you'll have twice as much to post about

[talynidm]

I have invested many years in theory and I promise my music has done nothing but improve.

Well, this might also be what is known in logic as a post hoc fallacy -- "because of this, therefore that." Which is to say, you assume that improvements in your music are because of your knowledge of music theory, but that's only an assumption on the basis of what seems an obvious connection. The problem with the assumption is that it isn't true for those who don't know music theory but have also experienced growth in their music skills. You might argue that their growth would have been greater with the knowledge you have, but there's simply no proof of this.

On top of that, it's opened my eyes and my mind to musical styles and characteristics I'd have never even HEARD of before.

While this may have been true for you, not everyone would necessarily appreciate these other musical styles. It's probably more true that you simply have a greater openness to a wider variety of music styles than many do, so music theory was a door to a greater variety for you than might have existed otherwise. It doesn't really prove the value of music theory in general for everyone, however.

I do think you make a wonderful ambassador, if you will, for the values of music theory for those who might be interested.

Wow, no one is holding a gun to your head and saying you have to learn anything, but alot of people in this thread seem to think that just because music theory has helped or improved what a person does, it is a crime.

In fact it seems most people who have some knowledge of music theory are willing to stray from it, and do so intentionally, to add different tonality, while it seems the people who are "anti" theory aren't willing to even ACCEPT the possibility that it could help.

Your statement is just a logical tautology, it's the same thing you are accusing others of, your opion is correct because it is based on a premise that you have decided was correct, so it follows you must be correct. It's like astrology, there is no way to discuss it, it's always correct because there is no way to verify anything and it is based on an assumption that assumes is correct, so it has to be.

^That is the nature of the arguements of people who are against learning music theory, they assume it won't help so therefore it couldn't possibly help. And you will never know because you won't TEST it, and you'll never TEST it because you have already decided it won't help you.

^That's not emotion, it's actually a rebutle of circular reasoning, with a proportional response of circular reasoning.

Is recreational arguing a sport?

[Toxikator]

which you should realize is a two way street...but again this thread is about why some people get emotional and you are a stunning example of my point...I'm not saying you're trying be better...I'm saying that every post you make seems to be about what you know...try listening and you'll have twice as much to post about

But why would you post unless you have something to say?

Just because every other post of mine isn't the grouphug smilie and a "You're so right!" doesn't mean I'm not listening.

Even if I take up arms of unfaltering ignorance and battle to my last ounce of strength against someone (Sascha Franck), that doesn't mean I don't learn from the knowledge they have to impart.

There are dozens of threads on this forum wherein I read what is written and nod silently, or else read what was written and quietly offer my own experience/knowledge.

Threads like these are about your opinions. I offer my opinions. it's fun

[fabi]

I have invested many years in theory and I promise my music has done nothing but improve.

Well, this might also be what is known in logic as a post hoc fallacy -- "because of this, therefore that." Which is to say, you assume that improvements in your music are because of your knowledge of music theory, but that's only an assumption on the basis of what seems an obvious connection. The problem with the assumption is that it isn't true for those who don't know music theory but have also experienced growth in their music skills. You might argue that their growth would have been greater with the knowledge you have, but there's simply no proof of this.

On top of that, it's opened my eyes and my mind to musical styles and characteristics I'd have never even HEARD of before.

While this may have been true for you, not everyone would necessarily appreciate these other musical styles. It's probably more true that you simply have a greater openness to a wider variety of music styles than many do, so music theory was a door to a greater variety for you than might have existed otherwise. It doesn't really prove the value of music theory in general for everyone, however.

I do think you make a wonderful ambassador, if you will, for the values of music theory for those who might be interested.

Wow, no one is holding a gun to your head and saying you have to learn anything, but alot of people in this thread seem to think that just because music theory has helped or improved what a person does, it is a crime.

In fact it seems most people who have some knowledge of music theory are willing to stray from it, and do so intentionally, to add different tonality, while it seems the people who are "anti" theory aren't willing to even ACCEPT the possibility that it could help.

Your statement is just a logical tautology, it's the same thing you are accusing others of, your opion is correct because it is based on a premise that you have decided was correct, so it follows you must be correct. It's like astrology, there is no way to discuss it, it's always correct because there is no way to verify anything and it is based on an assumption that assumes is correct, so it has to be.

^That is the nature of the arguements of people who are against learning music theory, they assume it won't help so therefore it couldn't possibly help. And you will never know because you won't TEST it, and you'll never TEST it because you have already decided it won't help you.

^That's not emotion, it's actually a rebutle of circular reasoning, with a proportional response of circular reasoning.

Is recreational arguing a sport?

oh, really?

it seems the people who are "anti" theory aren't willing to even ACCEPT the possibility that it could help

no, it doesn't. unless you have a strange sense of perception.
as far as i can tell there are those who are scared shitless of letting go of their precious knowledge of theory/precious ignorance of theory and condemn anyone who might dare to employ/dare not to employ it...

and then there are those healthy individuals in between who don't give a rat's ass about controlling and judging what everyone else does and live and let live... just let everyone do what they want and not force their own insecurities upon others... make noise, make waltzes, whatever floats your boat.



i mean, would you go and meditate for ten years in a buddhist monastery right now, just cause someone told you it was the right thing to do and that you're not in a position to judge and should therefore go to the monastery?

OF COURSE there are people who will, at least partially, claim superiority simply to prove to themselves they haven't wasted their time. OF COURSE there are people who will, at least partially, claim superiority for not obeying theory, just cause they are lazy asses without talent.
OF COURSE people without knowledge of theory will be hard-pressed to understand its merits. just as much as people with knowledge of theory will find it hard to let go of that and just observe things as they are, without trying to categorize and anaylse by patterns allowed for by theory.

but is it really so hard to understand that what others do may be swell for them and vice versa? ... i guess that's all this thread is about.

do we want to argue about comics vs hight art next?

[Zyxoas]

f**k!! I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT YOU PEOPLE HAVE THE PATIENCE TO READ ALL THIS NONSENSE!!

WTF??

All these meta-discussions (where you discuss threads instead of topics) are really sad...

[nuffink]

f**k!! I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT YOU PEOPLE HAVE THE PATIENCE TO READ ALL THIS NONSENSE!!

WTF??

All these meta-discussions (where you discuss threads instead of topics) are really sad...

Nah, they don't get really sad until the fifth recursion.

But thanks for joining the thread to point out that the thread's not worthwhile. Always worthwhile when somebody does that.

[fabi]

f**k!! I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT YOU PEOPLE HAVE THE PATIENCE TO READ ALL THIS NONSENSE!!

WTF??

All these meta-discussions (where you discuss threads instead of topics) are really sad...

so either you do have the same patience that allows others to read this thread, or you don't know whether or not what's in this thread is actually nonsense.

[talynidm]

BTW....

This isn't the main reason I "might" be emotional about music theory, but it's close to the top of the list:

Lots of time has been wasted trying to work with people that can't even play in tune, in various bands.

I just had to type that to restore "thread integrity"....