Does Knowledge of Theory Help You?

[bernhardtjeff]

stuff

And this is relevent after-the-fact...how? My point has already been discovered. Alot of things in theory are very questionable.

stuff

No one is saying that words have no meaning, but in this case "classical" no one is depating the meaning of the word, we are debating the meaning of the genera and what falls into it. Hanz and Bach fall into it. End of story...what is not to understand? Is it because I do not choose to nitpick? That i don't recognize the baraque era or renessance [sp?] era or what ever? Its all the same to me. Just like most country is the same, most rock is the same, most rap is the same etcetc..most classical is the same. I am sure I could listen to alot of classical and come up with an analasys, but most classical is a bore, unintresting, and without value. At most [and which also happens to be the case] alot of it can be used to see classical theory in practice. And that's it. And because of that, I am already predisposed to be biased on the subject. So what is the point?

Theories are 'just someones opinion'. Falling to my death isn't a theory. Saying its because of gravitational pull is [still] a theory. gravitational pull is still an unproven idea behind why things fall to the earth. And as someone mentioned before, the theory behind why things falls to earth changes often.

i don't know, then, what is the point? you seem to be the one who brought this all up. if you don't wanna learn theory, then don't. no big deal. but trying to argue with people about music theory when you don't want to learn it yourself is pretty weird.

i think you need to make sure you understand what others are saying to you before you should even consider continuing in this thread. if that doesn't fit your "theory" or "opinion" or whatever, than i don't see why anyone would continue trying to talk to you.

[The Fex]

Student stumps world's greatest minds by adding 'in YOUR opinion' to end of every argument

[jopy]

i don't know, then, what is the point?

why didn't i think to ask this question? that's really what's getting on my nerves here.

sixoffour: theory is just opinions.
theoryheads: yes, music theory courses encourage debate and consideration of alternative ways of thinking about musical concepts. it's not a set of rules and some people don't find it useful.
sixoffour: yeah, but music theory is debatable.
theoryheads: of course it is. no one said it isn't.
sixoffour: yeah, but music theory is just a set of rules.
theoryheads: of course it isn't. no one who uses theory said said it is. it's a multitude of perspectives on how to describe musical practice and it's changed greatly over years.
sixoffour: yeah, but music theory is just your opinion and your opinion is completely wrong because i know everything about theory already without having to learn it. you should be open-minded and iconoclastic exactly like me.
theoryheads: GAH!

[amiga909]

stated before:
- without forgetting about theory no (good) music.
-> if this statement was wrong, a robot (+ theory database) could make better music than a human.

- without theory no musical progress (no abstraction of mistakes or succeedings)
-> if this statement was wrong, you would make worse music the older you become because thinking about what u have done (and therefore theorizing about) is inevitable.

for your counterarguments:

Student stumps world's greatest minds by adding 'in YOUR opinion' to end of every argument

its all in YOUR opinion!

[The Fex]

I have absolutely no idea what it is you're trying to say.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

Sometimes yes it does help but when im writing riffs and jamming them out with one of the bands i am a member of it really does not as vibe and instinct comes in between the other musicians and myself like 'the nod' if something is thrashing well and spastic head banging on breakdowns with the old 360' guitar slings and then eyes closed when we hit the doom button.

If i was a guy who composed solo at a computer then it might be more useful to me, as it is nah not really

Nekro

Thrash 'Til Death

Edit:

Ogg Vorbis i somewhat agree and have been subject to what you mention in your original post, first statement > Nekro unlearned stuff to set Nekro free

[ivory1029]

Music theory isn't required, but it cannot hurt.

In my opinion, of course.

[amiga909]

I have absolutely no idea what it is you're trying to say.

if you expand the meaning of 'musical theory' and allow all sorts of music theory (classic music theory à la Beethoven, technical for engineers, philosophically à la John Cage, etc.) the question becomes obsolete.

if you narrow down the meaning of music theory to eg. Arnold Schoenbergs Dodekaphony the question 'theory necessary yes or no?' makes sense. I'd say clearly no here because its too fixed to a certain music culture and a techno producer really does not need that.


-> its then rather a matter of which theory for which music style is inevitable? and: which theory for which music style is blocking creativity?

[jopy]

-> its then rather a matter of which theory for which music style is inevitable? and: which theory for which music style is blocking creativity?

i like that. it's probably far more informative to say, "which music theory do you find useful" than to ask "is music theory useful." your question opens up a whole new field of discussion.

I know a guy called Roy, but he's only A Roy, not The Roy.

[Meffy]

That is how science works.

Observed it in action, have you? In your own workplace? With you as an informed participant?

It's always fascinating to read a letter from the front from someone who understands these things so deeply.

ANYwayyy, the answer to the question is Yes. Knowledge of music theory does help me. End of discussion.

[soulata]

In the end, I think I have a nice relationship with it. It helps me to stay in my job and as I probably would've never made it to a great "intuitive" songwriter or so, that might not be a drawback, either.

Cheers
Sascha

My case exactly

Anyway, know of any good tricks to tickle the imagination in an otherwise unintuintive songwritter?

I write a lot and it's not all bad but I do miss some life in my writting ...

[soulata]

i dont see a connection between money and music.

Strictly on a personal level: I do see this connection very clearly. You may call this an unfortunate even, and I may even agree with you.
Originally, I always thought something like "yeah, music must come from the heart, it must be a thing of intuition, refelecting my inner feelings" etc.
But once you work as a musician, this is simply not the entire truth anymore.

Having said that, I'd almost place a bet that 95% of "working" musicians do have at least some theoretical knowledge (which doesn't mean it's gotta be "standard" theory knowledge, there's more to it, IMO).
In case you really "plan" to make a living as a musician, you will most likely need to know some things about theory. All the studio musicians I know do. All the regularly hired live musicians do as well. All the arrangers, producers, etc - they all do as well.

It's really not about whatever wellknown acts.
Take me as an example. Almost nobody outside Hannover/Germany has ever heard my name (ok, minus some internet folks) as being a relatively sucessful guitar player. But I am just that. I'm making my living out of playing guitar. And it's defenitely not because I can play some guitar-hero-ish 32nds at 180 BPM (I simply can't), but because I have a relatively proper allround sense of music and some knowledge theories behind it. And again, it's not only some sort of classical theory. It's also something like "oh, we could do with some country-ish chord-swell licks, but dirtier, think Tom Waits or so". To me, something like that is just as much of some theoretic knowledge as knowing about drop 2 4-part voicings.

As said, once you're in the realm of "working musicians", they will all know the things they're doing more or less well. And most (if not all of them) will also show some flexibility and familiarity with various styles (pretty much the reason why none of all those endless YouToube guitar shredders will ever play a paid job in all their life).
Personally, I can't compete with any of the wellknown guitar heroes. For obvious reasons, I also can't comnpete with whatever "stars", producers, remixers, arrangers, songwriters and what not. But a rather broad knowledge of things is what keeps me getting paid. I would have absolutely no chance to survive in this environment otherwise.

Now, we may start a (rather philosophical) discussion about whether this is making music as it's meant to be. But, again strictly personal, as I'd probably never made it as either a songwriter, producer, arranger, etc. or as an instrumentalist on my own, I can only say that I'm quite happy about the way things turned out for me.
And my knowledge of certain "theories" has been quite a part of that experience.

Cheers
Sascha

ditto on that as well. I'd add that you have to be relatively easy to get on with as well if that's your field of work. (mine's as well)

[Sixofour]

i don't know, then, what is the point?

why didn't i think to ask this question? that's really what's getting on my nerves here.

sixoffour: theory is just opinions.
theoryheads: yes, music theory courses encourage debate and consideration of alternative ways of thinking about musical concepts. it's not a set of rules and some people don't find it useful.
sixoffour: yeah, but music theory is debatable.
theoryheads: of course it is. no one said it isn't.
sixoffour: yeah, but music theory is just a set of rules.
theoryheads: of course it isn't. no one who uses theory said said it is. it's a multitude of perspectives on how to describe musical practice and it's changed greatly over years.
sixoffour: yeah, but music theory is just your opinion and your opinion is completely wrong because i know everything about theory already without having to learn it. you should be open-minded and iconoclastic exactly like me.
theoryheads: GAH!

No wonder you don't understand what I am saying. Esp because ive not posed a single view suggesting anything you have implied that I did.

I got it now, you are one of those stuck up guys who gets so mad when someone demeans something you consider so great [music theory] and now you have degraded yourself to basic accusations and ad homanen.

Lets go through this.

1. Theories are just opinions. If it was a fact, it would be a fact. Do you deny that a theory is an opinion?

2. Certain aspects of music theory are debateable..again, you deny that?

3. I never said music theory was a set of rules, nor implied it, So basicly, you are just lieing throubh your teeth. You brought up the idea of it being a set of rules.

4. Rubbish

So basicly, You think Theory is fact, and that not a single part of it is debateable or to be questioned. That is jmeier's view everyone. He disagrees with music theory being the opinions of many people over the years, and he disagrees with any part of it being in any shape or form questionable. So basicly you are an example of my point. If I am wrong, then your accusations are unreasonable and this arguement was over 4 pages ago.

Why can't you just admit some aspects of theory may be wrong and should be questioned? Your arrogance cannot even permit that? You would rather argue stupid arguements than just say "Yeah, Music Theroy has some stuff in it that may be shitfaced wrong"

[Meffy]

Sixofour, calm down and behave civilly. You'll get just one warning this time.

[Sixofour]

stuff

Who said anything about not learning theory?

I'm talking about not holding theory up to infallable standards. Its something many young musicians fall into, they learn theory then they get an arrogant superiority complex and act as if they are masters of the universe. And this phenomena is VERY common. Look at jmeier for instance.