Music Theory books based on Piano Rolls not Staffs?

[metalifuxx]

I can't read music on a staff, nor can I write it in staff form. I can improvise and know some chord structures on the keyboard, and scales/intervals from having played guitar, like diminished and whole tone. But if I really am trying to write/compose a specific part on the keyboard, most is guess work, and comes from playing by ear and feeling and the conclusion of "Yeah, that sounds about right, it should work..". After I get the basic feeling, I might try to develope that scale/theme/motif more with other layers/synth sounds/real guitar. If I really need to, then I will go in and edit on the piano roll, but only if I get about 95% of the take right from playing it on the keyboard first.

My friend who got a 4 year music degree from a traditional non-music specialized school, in general music theory/jazz/clascical with a focus on guitar as his main instrument, can only still read and compose with staff notation, such as with Cakewalk Sonar's staff editor. He never found the piano roll intuitive, and rather a labor to try and use. He not only does classical type orchestrated pieces, but he can also write intricate electronic/pop/rock or any other genre, using staff notation alone, including all drum/percussion tracks, be they electronic or real sampled drums. This alone amazes me, because his forte is almost strictly guitar theory. But once you learn any music theory with actual musical notation, you can compose for just about any genre

[cryophonik]

music theory is music theory. there is no 'music theory for guitarists' or for piano roll...

I agree and would add, to that end, that there is no "music theory for pianists" or "music composers/scorers", which validates the OP's point IMO. Music theory is a vast paradigm that covers a lot more than just the piano player or score reader/writer's perspective. All he's asking for is to have a book that presents music theory in a perspective that he is most familiar with. As mentioned above, there are books that present its music theory concepts and examples in tablature format for guitarists and bassists, so why not the piano roll as well?

Even though I prefer to see standard notation, music theory is not, and should not be viewed as, a narrowly constricted framework of rules - it encompasses all forms of music and all methods of creating it. The times are changing and the PRV is fast becoming a standard method of composing music, so there's no reason that music theory books shouldn't adapt, and I suspect that they will.

[jplanet]

Jancivil, great posts! I agree on all points, with the only exception to defend the advantage of tablature in some circumstances in order to accurately document a guitar performance. The clefs can accurately record any keyboard performance, but in many guitar performances, a guitarist may begin reading a piece by playing it in one position on the fretboard, and then find that a note is impossible to reach, so they must relearn in another position. A guitarist must also relearn the clefs for open tunings, whereas tablature would remain consistently easy to read.

For the record, I can and do read and write on clefs for several instruments - I just find that the clefs, in many cases, leave too much to the imagination when it comes to guitar specifically, unless we are talking about a chord chart, and not something that requires a specific fingering or alternate tuning...

Also, I do not support the idea of using tablature to demonstrate theory - I support only for teaching and learning guitar performance.

[tomtoo]

Hi ,

after looking into a lot of books (i also have taken some piano lessons).

There is 1 book i dont want to miss.

It's called "1000 tips für keyboards".Its German so maybe it wont help if you dont know german , but if you know, get it and work with it !!

Music theory is not about notation , what ever way it will get notatet in 500 years, its still music theory.

Greatings
Thomas

[coquillo]

I am expert in piano roll composition, I write directly to it and do not bother notating beforehand (sometimes after) but I would never confound it (or tablature) in teaching the mechanics of music theory. it's quite an absurd notion.

I don't see the absurdity. You are writing music with the piano roll (exactly what the OP wants to do). The only problem is how to explain that process.

[skot-e]

Sure, these are people that think they will avoid the whole process of becoming a musician and jump to the front of the line, the top of the heap. but they'll cheat themselves in the bargain.

To be honest my point of this thread was not to 'Avoid the whole process' at all, i think people look at music in different ways and have different perspectives to how they can write down ideas from their imagination into a format which suits them.

The point which i want to get across is, does it really matter if the musician learns from a piano roll or a staff?, just as long as the relevent information as to why the notes are placed at certain positions and the effects on its harmonic or melodic reasoning are stated.

[Ooops]

There is a book called "Music theory for computer musicians". The examples alternate between staff and piano roll. It's a very easy read, and I wholeheartily recommend it. However, the book will assume that you do look at the staff examples and try to uderstand them, because after all, it's a theory book. But the piano roll examples might make it easier for you in the end.

[gdev1981]

Some people can be snobbish about this stuff.

'Oh my! this pleb would like to learn music theory without learning to read music! scoff! scoff! gaffore!'

It's a shame to see someone ask an innocent question only to be dragged into a debate as to wether the lazy under-class should be allowed to learn music in a more convenient way.

No! Make him learn latin like the rest of us did!

Is it 1611?

[Jbravo]

it sounds to me like all you need to do is to be able to read the pitch of notes in musical notation, which is really not that complicated, so I would say start with that, and it will get you a long way in learning about chords and chords progressions etc. That and a good ear should be all you need, however some of the best virtuoso musicians who can read read and play music on the fly have no creative ability at all, which goes to show that learning these things from a purely academic view will not get you very far if you don't have a natural instinct for these things (imho)

[trewq]

I agree that there is much more to it than the piano roll, its other software tools that place the notes onto it, as well as traditional theory and your evolving ear to make changes needed. Whether these software tools become a crutch depends on the user - tenatious testing of these tools often result in unique ideas (not talking about auto-accompanyment). But everyone has his own way, I like to combine with tech.

[bugs]

Why not learn to read music?

[HunterKiller]

Some people can be snobbish about this stuff.

'Oh my! this pleb would like to learn music theory without learning to read music! scoff! scoff! gaffore!'

It's a shame to see someone ask an innocent question only to be dragged into a debate as to wether the lazy under-class should be allowed to learn music in a more convenient way.

No! Make him learn latin like the rest of us did!

Is it 1611?

[deleted]

DELETED

[coquillo]

give us a hard and fast rule how to determine intervalls in the piano roll WITHOUT counting halfsteps and knowing by heart how many halfsteps equal any given intervall ( say a diminished seventh ) - looking at the staff you can recognize the basic size of an intervall immidiately ...

it's NOT about being lazy it's about being efficient imo

Not possible IMHO. However you go about it you will need to know what notes, scales and chords are and how to manipulate them. If you really are too bone idle to do any studying, then like I said before "just use the black notes".

[deleted]

DELETED