It had nothing to do with the merits of theory, or at least I didn't intend for it to. More about the thread topic of people getting emotional about the subject of theory.VicDiesel wrote:I'm not sure that your statement has anything to do with the merits of theory.The Chase wrote:In my experience though, if someone can't make decent music before theory, they wont make decent music after
So why DO people get so emotional about music theory topics?
-
- KVRAF
- 10597 posts since 13 Jun, 2004 from Alberto Balsam
-
- KVRAF
- 13442 posts since 14 Nov, 2000 from Hannover / Germany
IMO it's easy to get "trapped in theory". When I was intensively studying theory, I felt into that trap as well. For me, this was true for both instrumental and compositional skills.
And it's not all that easy to get rid of it, especially regarding instrumental skills. When you learn, say, scales over chords all day long, it's really tough to break free and do something that doesn't fit into the theoretical schemes you're just dealing with.
In addition, back when I've been studying, I've been playing in a band, and the singer was writing almost all the songs, which we would then arrange together in the rehearsal room. Now, more than once it happened that we needed a bunch of additional chords or whatever. And seriously, all I could come up with at that time was stuff that was "theoretically proven", whereas the singer would just grab his guitar and play *something*. Well... we usually ended up with his version. That was a true eye opener to me. I really had to learn to forget about most of the theory stuff temporarily. Still doesn't work that well...
However, something that theory *can* do is helping you to accomplish jobs. If I needed to arrange a little 4-part horn section in, say, a pop-jazz-funk style, I'd probably manage to do so. This is really tough without any theoretical knowledge. The same goes for "proper" soloing over a jazzy chord progression. And for a lot of other things as well.
Yet, I don't exactly think that theory knowledge is that much of a helper in the pop/dance composing realm. When you look through, say, the top 100s of the last decades, I'm sure the majority of hits were done by "not-exactly-educated" folks.
And it's not all that easy to get rid of it, especially regarding instrumental skills. When you learn, say, scales over chords all day long, it's really tough to break free and do something that doesn't fit into the theoretical schemes you're just dealing with.
In addition, back when I've been studying, I've been playing in a band, and the singer was writing almost all the songs, which we would then arrange together in the rehearsal room. Now, more than once it happened that we needed a bunch of additional chords or whatever. And seriously, all I could come up with at that time was stuff that was "theoretically proven", whereas the singer would just grab his guitar and play *something*. Well... we usually ended up with his version. That was a true eye opener to me. I really had to learn to forget about most of the theory stuff temporarily. Still doesn't work that well...
However, something that theory *can* do is helping you to accomplish jobs. If I needed to arrange a little 4-part horn section in, say, a pop-jazz-funk style, I'd probably manage to do so. This is really tough without any theoretical knowledge. The same goes for "proper" soloing over a jazzy chord progression. And for a lot of other things as well.
Yet, I don't exactly think that theory knowledge is that much of a helper in the pop/dance composing realm. When you look through, say, the top 100s of the last decades, I'm sure the majority of hits were done by "not-exactly-educated" folks.
There are 3 kinds of people:
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
Those who can do maths and those who can't.
-
- KVRAF
- 9589 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
Probably been mentioned before but,did'nt Miles Davies say something like,learn all music theory there is and then forget it. That's just one mans opinion of course but herr Francks post made me think about that statement for some reason.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111238 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
VicDiesel wrote:
Anyway, if you want to argue that it's bad musicians who grasp at theory as their last straw, and then get emotional in defending theoretical correctness, fine.
Victor.
hmmm wasnt chase that said it, twas me
and for the record it was merely sarcasm
cept the chris de burgh bit, i meant that implicitly.
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
vurt wrote:you want an example of a musician who creates painful to hear music even after many years of study?
i give you chris de burgh.
I saw him open for Asia, I had this thing about seeing opening bands at shows...I figured I was paying for it so I should see it, plus it was a good time to get stoked for the headliner. Sometimes I was wrong 
fwiw, I wasn't planning on going to the show, my best friend was taking his sister to the show (heat of the moment tour). She cancelled on him so I went. I wasn't a fan of Asia, but was a fan of everyone in Asia. Out of the myriad of shows I went to in the 80's it remains one of the best...Asia that is, not chris
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111238 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
id rather stick these...
in my own eyes than see that evil incarnate bastard live.
all of them.
in my own eyes than see that evil incarnate bastard live.all of them.
-
- Rad Grandad
- 38041 posts since 6 Sep, 2003 from Downeast Maine
vurt wrote:id rather stick these...
all of them.
The highest form of knowledge is empathy, for it requires us to suspend our egos and live in another's world. It requires profound, purpose‐larger‐than‐the‐self kind of understanding.
-
- KVRAF
- 4669 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from U.A.E
Basjoe wrote:So, why DO people get so emotional about Chris de Burgh ?
Basjoe
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111238 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
laputa_sync wrote:Basjoe wrote:So, why DO people get so emotional about Chris de Burgh ?
Basjoe
-
- KVRAF
- 4669 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from U.A.E
vurt, oops, never realised....thats one of my favourite songs. Chris De Burgh is now my hero.
i hate the tune really, but i was indoctrinated with it when younger.... b*stards...b*starrds!!!
i hate the tune really, but i was indoctrinated with it when younger.... b*stards...b*starrds!!!
-
- KVRian
- 593 posts since 18 Dec, 2005 from Sweden
Sometimes it looked like clips from "The ring", no fly though. The three wise men made my day! Them colours man! It goes lalala!? Deep.vurt wrote:laputa_sync wrote:Basjoe wrote:So, why DO people get so emotional about Chris de Burgh ?
Basjoe
The comments were great especially: "aww u put the inspiration of god in me." and "You should ask Chris to re-release this song with your video clip. An amazing job with the video."
-
- KVRAF
- 2830 posts since 2 Mar, 2003 from The only civilized county in Texas
Ok, so the guy is banality personified.vurt wrote:actually for me its a different reason..
Where did you get the notion that he's stiff with theory? I just checked out Lady in Red, and it's no more than a competently written sappy tune. It's not theoretically interesting or sophisticated. In fact, it has two parallel fifths right before the chorus (the V-VIm-V right before the I) so it isn't even correct.
Victor.
PS that spaceman song is pretty bad too, purely from a point of bad taste. I didn't bother to analyse it.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5703 posts since 8 Dec, 2004 from The Twin Cities