noobie needs help!

[heathen]

first post here, great forum by the way. the gist of my question/problem is this. how much music theory does one need to make music? i have just gotten into the computer music production about 6 months ago. usually what will happen is i will get a 4, 8, or 16 measure musical "idea" (loops), and then find myself unable to move beyond that. this "idea" is usually fully fleshed out with bassline, melody, effects etc. and often times i will associate it with a "chorus", sometimes a verse, especially if it is more of a groove. but then i find i cannot add to it musically, in order to come up with a complete track. i pull out the guitar and try to find the next peice of music that will go with what i have got, and it usually doesnt come. i get bored, start playing with another synthesizer, and come up with something else completely different, and so on and so on. i know a little theory. but i have been under the impression that if you dont "hear" it, then no amount of music theory will help you write a song. theory to me has always been just a technical explanation of something that will come naturally. am i wrong? should i learn more theory? can what i now know help me get past these humps? will a better understanding of theory enable me to find something to play when all my riffing just leads to dead ends? any input, advise, anecdotes etc. very welcome....
thanks.

[C00kie]

how much music theory does one need to make music?

The bare minimum is none at all

Learning more theory might broaden your palette of available stuff you can throw at your musical canvas.

i know a little theory. but i have been under the impression that if you dont "hear" it, then no amount of music theory will help you write a song. theory to me has always been just a technical explanation of something that will come naturally. am i wrong?

That's my view on the subject also. It will give you the right terminology and a vocabulary to describe common concepts in music, and that will ease communication about it. New chords & scales might serve as an inspriration.

usually what will happen is i will get a 4, 8, or 16 measure musical "idea" (loops), and then find myself unable to move beyond that. this "idea" is usually fully fleshed out with bassline, melody, effects etc. and often times i will associate it with a "chorus", sometimes a verse, especially if it is more of a groove. but then i find i cannot add to it musically, in order to come up with a complete track.

So you do have a basic idea (a riff or chord progression or whatever) and that's that. Try to find a bigger structure around it: either the traditional "song" structure (intro, verse, chorus, bridge, outro) or something more modern (slow buildup, repeating pattern, breakdown, build up again)

Some people just like noodling and never finish anything

[ckatrun411]

IMHO, music theory is based on the practices of great composers. All of whom have studied theory.

The question is, why begrudge yourself even the most basic understanding?

Perhaps slowly is the way to go. For a great read, check out...

" music theory made easy " by david harp


Welcome to the wonderful world of music.


---
Kat

[llatham]

the gist of my question/problem is this. how much music theory does one need to make music?

In one sense, you don't need any "theory" to create music. We could of course argue that even the basics, like building chords, or using a scale, is of course "theory" in some regard, but when most people ask a question like this they usually mean "more advanced" theory.

I think that music theory serves three major purposes:

1. To provide a language and set of tools common to various styles of music. For example, if you want to make music like X songwriter, if you understand the tools they use, and can understand the language used to teach and learn those skills, you too can use those tools in your musical pursuits. We might call these "Rudiments" of music (naming scales, chords, intervals, etc.)

2. To provide a means of comprehending music and musical styles, and for using those for your own playing or creation. For example, knowing what notes are in an E7#9 chord would be useful for improvising or writing a melody over that chord. Likewise, understanding how to transpose a set of chords from one key to another could be useful to a musician. So these we might call "Practical" elements of music.

3. To provide a method for comparative analysis. This to me is what "theory" taught in Universities is about (for common practice period music, not Jazz theory per se, but is applicable there). When we learn about things like "Neapolitan Sixth" chords, or "Enharmonic Modulation" we are pointing out elements in the music that are shared by pieces and we can thus categorize them as belonging to the same style and compare them to each other. For example, when we say "Tonic" in CPP music, we differentiate Modal music from that by using the word "Final" to describe a related, but distinct concept. Thus we can group music that shares "arrival at the Tonic" as an important aspect of the music (which is Tonal music) and discuss that apart from music where "arrival at the Final" is the guiding principle. We might call this "true Theory", though that's a little condescending.

My personal feeling is, we're on this planet for a short time, why not learn everything you can! Some people feel that learning theory will "corrupt" them. I disagree. You can always learn how to use a diminished scale over X chord and then simply not use it if the work doesn't call for it. But if you've ever only learned Major and minor scales, you certainly won't be able to use a diminished scale when the work calls for it! In fact, you might even "dumb down" your playing/composing (intentionally or unintentionally) because of your "ignorance". So I say, learn all you can, and then you'll have the tools you need, and you'll know when and if to use them. Just never forget that while theory can be practical, and even insprational, sometimes, "feel" is just as important - never lose sight of that.

Best
LSL

[heathen]

thanks for all the replys.
i have no aversion to learning more music theory. i feel like i know some theory, and have struggled with how to use it to make my music "better", only to come up with the same stuff i come up with by just listening...
what triggered my question has been my inability to finish tracks, either because i am sick of them, or because i like them and feel like more work will degrade something good, or more specifically to this forum, that i am unable to come up with more music i.e., chord changes that go with what i already have, or a different melody that still somehow relates to other things etc. or whatever...
music theory to me has always been just a way to communicate with other musicians, in order to slightly reduce the amount of noise when jamming together. i have never seen how i might apply it to more easily write songs, or make "better" (more satisfying) music.
maybe if my understanding were not so superficial, i could apply it towards my music, beyond just analyzing what is already there...
anyway thanks for the replys. sorry about the long-windedness...
cheers

[llatham]

in order to slightly reduce the amount of noise when jamming together. i have never seen how i might apply it to more easily write songs, or make "better" (more satisfying) music.
maybe if my understanding were not so superficial, i could apply it towards my music, beyond just analyzing what is already there...
anyway thanks for the replys. sorry about the long-windedness...
cheers

This is partly what I was referring to with the "true theory". A good example of this is a common story amongst composition instructors: A student comes in with 8 or 16 bars, and then says "I can't make it go any further" or "what do I do now".

This is a twofold issue:

1. To draw an analogy - when a writer sits down to write a novel, they don't just start typing "It was a dark and stormy night...". They usually have an idea of the plot line, the characters, if there will be plot twists, if there will be flashbacks, if it will be a period piece or sci-fi, etc. Likewise, composers (and other "songwriters" to a degree) usually find it beneficial to kind of "map out" or, "outline" what their piece is going to do. In other words, they usually have some sort of goal in mind, and mold the music so it drives towards that goal. Now, popular music is a touch different, because the types of goals are a little different (much modern pop music is designed to support the lyrics for example). But, I think sitting down and thinking about where you want the music to go can be extremely beneficial in making it actually go somewhere!

2. Most people concentrate (in learning theory) on the microscopic details - how to spell chords, scales/keys, progressions, etc. Few people think as much about the big picture - the form. Again, classical music is different than pop, but in either it can help to understand the Forms that are stylistically common - and then derivations or expansions of those forms. I think anyone with any creativity will likely find themselves getting bored with a 4 bar loop, even if they continually vary it - at some point it becomes repetitive. But understanding Verse, Chorus, Bridge, etc. structure can be extremely helpful in "breaking out of that rut" and trying different things. Here, classical ideas of modulation, mode mixture, related keys, and so forth can breath new life into tried and true pop music forms. So again, here's where "theory" can help you out/inspire you.

Try listening to pieces, and listen to the song structure/form. Find ones you find satisfying and see if they have anything in common. Many of the 80s guitar songs had these gratuitous solos in there, that had no reason for being there other than they felt they needed to include a guitar solo. But others - like the Randy Rhoads in Ozzy solos, tend to be an important part of the song structurally - compositionally, structurally, and for maintaining iterest. If you think about it, you will probably start to question when you feel your music needs repeat, subtle change, or completely new material at X point, and then you can decide how related each section needs to be.

HTH,
LSL

[heathen]

[/quote]This is partly what I was referring to with the "true theory". A good example of this is a common story amongst composition instructors: A student comes in with 8 or 16 bars, and then says "I can't make it go any further" or "what do I do now".[/quote]


this is exactly my situation!
and my best tracks so far have been almost like epiphanies...i get that 8 or 16 bar loop....and as i listen it all unfolds in my mind, in a general sense...begining, end, breaks, melody etc.
"it was a dark and stormy night..."
this makes me think that 90% of what i come up with is all the same thing...its a perfect analogy, i think...i am that writer, at this point. hopefully i will move beyond that, and start to control, or form the music rather than the other way around...
well, thanks for the reply. food for thought, sort of reinforcing what i already knew. i think there is an intersection of talent and motivation, where motivation can make up for talent (whatever that is) but without motivation even the talented will never get anywhere...
practice makes perfect. off to make some noise.
thanks again.

[musikjock]

a lot of real good replies here. I'll throw in my short 2 cents (class starts in 10 min). I think you had the right idea by stating theory doesnt mean a whole lot unless you 'hear' it. I have been writing my own music for about 6 yrs now but have only looked into theory the last 2. Has my music writing gotten better because of it? probably a little. It definately doesn't hurt. My advice would be to study the basics of theory (circle of 5ths, modes and their respective implications) and most certainly understand chord degrees EG I IV V etc. More importantly, study your favorite songs. Analyze what notes are being played and their relationship to the basics of theory. Even if you don't want to study theory you should still study your favorite songs to atleast develop your ear in order to foresee your progressions. Also, study the instruments and the way each takes up a certain 'space' in the music. Eventually it will all start to fall in place and you'll have more musical ideas flooding your head then you'll know what to do with. Alright im out, hope this made sense.

[hersoot]

... this "idea" is usually fully fleshed out with bassline, melody, effects etc. and often times i will associate it with a "chorus", sometimes a verse, especially if it is more of a groove. but then i find i cannot add to it musically, in order to come up with a complete track...

It seems you have all the pieces but just need some inspiration. Why not combine some of your separate "ideas" and see how they fit. Say, for example, I have a a nicely worked-out thing based on a simple blues progression but it just seems to go on forever and get nowhere. Throw in a couple of verses of "Hesitation Blues" in the middle and it solves the problem.