Do you have to play an instrument?

[opiadream]

http://www.furious.com/perfect/bangseno.html

[Lunatique]

Ok, for those that thought my opinion about music theory is full of shit--please name anyone that you know, without any theory knowledge, who can compose highly complex and sophisticated orchestral works--let's say something like 19th century impressionism at the level of Ravel's Daphnis and Cloe or Debussy's Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faune. Now remember, not knowing music theory and being self-taught are two different things. Danny Elfman is self-taught, but he difinitely knows his music theory, and he has definitely studied it intensively.

Look, I'm self-taught like many of you here, and I really wish I can believe that without classical training I can one day become a real "composer," but in my heart, I know unless I go back to school and get a degree in composition, I would never be able to compose the kind of complex and sophisticated works I want to. Well, maybe if I am half as talent as Danny Elfman and tried half as hard as he does, maybe.

[vurt]

brian eno

[nuffink]

Ok, for those that thought my opinion about music theory is full of shit--please name anyone that you know, without any theory knowledge, who can compose highly complex and sophisticated orchestral works--let's say something like 19th century impressionism at the level of Ravel's Daphnis and Cloe or Debussy's Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faune.

Please tell me anyone who does know the theory and is working in that tradition who can compose music of that quality.

[kaden]

K

[TrekStar]

Please tell me anyone who does know the theory and is working in that tradition who can compose music of that quality.

yep...you're right...and that will be even more difficult without playing an instrument....

[VicDiesel]

Please tell me anyone who does know the theory and is working in that tradition who can compose music of that quality.

Well, no serious composer will work "in that tradition" if that's a tradition that's a century old. But as a composer of quality neo-romantic stuff I'll mention Tristan Keuris. Some of Luciano Berio's stuff would qualify too. Listen to his Sinfonia.

Lots of people like Arvo Part, who definitely has a classically romantic slant.

V.

[nrenda]

i wonder why the music theory is such an irritating thing? it is fun. it gets a month to learn the basics. it gets 2 years to learn basic harmony and write 4 part structures on plain paper. oh and you will find yourself improvising that harmony on the piano. well if you think you dont need those then dont bother. but dont forget. practice makes better. there are non musical tools used to make music. it is all in the concept of rythm and melody(generally)... but if you want to keep the audience alive, you have to do something that charms "humans".. do learn to play an instrument, if you can not, do use an object in an imaginative way, so people would appreciate it. and if you dont care about appreciation, well , as ive said, dont bother.

[TrekStar]

i wonder why the music theory is such an irritating thing? it is fun. it gets a month to learn the basics. it gets 2 years to learn basic harmony and write 4 part structures on plain paper. oh and you will find yourself improvising that harmony on the piano. well if you think you dont need those then dont bother. but dont forget. practice makes better. there are non musical tools used to make music. it is all in the concept of rythm and melody(generally)... but if you want to keep the audience alive, you have to do something that charms "humans".. do learn to play an instrument, if you can not, do use an object in an imaginative way, so people would appreciate it. and if you dont care about appreciation, well , as ive said, dont bother.

100% agreed. good points. I am also wondering why it is such a pain for the people to learn an instrument/the theory. The musicians I know are hardly to separate from their instrument.

[VicDiesel]

i wonder why the music theory is such an irritating thing?

Yes, I sense a lot of defensiveness masquerading as aggression on the part of people who who are unschooled (whether formally or self). Personally I'm quite schooled, both self and formally, but I have no problem with people who don't consciously know theory.

I'll admit that there are people who are paralysed by theory, but there are also people who for knowing only 2 chords will simply never produce anything worth listening to. However, while, especially in "popular" music there are plenty of people who make great music with 3 chords (the whole of blues, for instance), it seems to me that there is evidence that with limited formal knowledge you limit yourself to small-scale structures.

See for instance Paul McCartney who is a perfect song writer, but whose attempts at symphonic length music are universally considered to stink. There are more like that.

And for every Barry White who can intuitively put together an orchestral arrangement, there are zillions of other who wouldn't know how to arrange for more than 2 guitars, bass and drum. If that.

So, I think that while skills and theory may not be necessary, in the hands of a real musician it can only give better results.

What I really don't get is people who argue that one is less for knowing more.

V.

[Hink]

There were 1/4 step pianos, though I think it was around the 1400s it was popular.

Doesn't sound familiar. Link?

I was thinking of this thing:



V.

I have no link I learned about it in music theory back in 1983 or 84 in my college days...but I havn't seen that, it looks cool

[Hink]

i wonder why the music theory is such an irritating thing? it is fun. it gets a month to learn the basics. it gets 2 years to learn basic harmony and write 4 part structures on plain paper. oh and you will find yourself improvising that harmony on the piano. well if you think you dont need those then dont bother. but dont forget. practice makes better. there are non musical tools used to make music. it is all in the concept of rythm and melody(generally)... but if you want to keep the audience alive, you have to do something that charms "humans".. do learn to play an instrument, if you can not, do use an object in an imaginative way, so people would appreciate it. and if you dont care about appreciation, well , as ive said, dont bother.

It's quite simple actually, those who feel they don't need theory and/or just never bothered learning quite often become defensive as if they need to validate their equality amongst those who do learn some or a lot of theory. It's really (the matter) kind of human nature. For instance I'm not gonna get defensive about knowing theory, and someone else who choose's to forgoe theory has no impact on me or my music. Who am I to judge someone else's method of artistic expression?...

[donkey tugger]

Hmm, I sense a bit of goalpost shifting going on here.

I don't think many people would ever argue that knowing theory/being a skilled instrumentalist is a bad thing (except me having a pop at some irritating c**ts in the pub earller ) , rather they would take issue with the assertion made by some nutnecks that it is absolutely essential to make any music worth listening to.

[jens]

Yes, I have to admit I was also only being defensive about my general and utter lack of knowledge

[jens]

Hmm, I sense a bit of goalpost shifting going on here.

I don't think many people would ever argue that knowing theory/being a skilled instrumentalist is a bad thing (except me having a pop at some irritating c**ts in the pub earller ) , rather they would take issue with the assertion made by some nutnecks that it is absolutely essential to make any music worth listening to.