How much does music theory really shape your compositions?

[_leras]

What is even the meant by music theory? How to notate, scales and modes?

Does it cover ryhtym, arrangement, composition? Sound design?

is there a timbre theory?

[wagtunes]

It's really hard to answer this question. When I first started, I knew nothing and my songs sounded like garbage. So I learned theory (went to college) and my songs got better.

Fast forward 40 years. Today, I write by feel. I don't really think about the theory. I'm sure it's there. But so many times I toss it out the window because I'm going for a certain sound or feel or vibe or whatever. Sometimes I just feel like doing stupid stuff.

Point is, I've stopped thinking in I V VI IV or let's modulate a half step so that the next chorus sounds a little more exciting or okay, I've done verse, verse, chorus, verse, chorus so it's time to do a bridge and make sure it says something that hasn't been already said in the song. Maybe it all goes on internally or subconsciously but I just don't think about it anymore.

I do know this much. Without music theory, I would have never gotten to where I am. Because I had ZERO talent.

[DrOcsid]

While I tend to focus more on doing what sounds good to me, knowing even just basic music theory has been a very useful reference point. It's easier to break "rules" in an effective manner when you know what they are. I'm still in the process of learning scales but knowing the patterns to major and minor key help me with improvising on the piano, for instance. It's very easy to psyche yourself out when it comes to art, so knowing what scale I'm writing in helps keep my ear from playing tricks on me.

Same deal for time signatures, term definitions, and especially chords. On the whole I see it as a framework for building something I can then refine and add some character or fun oddities into like borrowed notes.

[dps]

I always heard learn the rules to break the rules, and I largely think I agree with that. Music theory taught me how to think about harmony very intuitively. I have struggled with jazz slightly more though, and sometimes I wonder if focusing too much on classical western harmony can detract from skills gained in other musical domains.

[Dexter US]

Mostly I do it by ear. I use lfo's in alot of cases and a few sequencers in vcv rack... I find that mixing low and high bpm's isn't working that well as a concept so I might have some roadblocks that I should research..

[jancivil]

sometimes I wonder if focusing too much on classical western harmony can detract from skills gained in other musical domains.

It didn't for me at all. I knew jazz theory before I had any course in a school, eventually I went as far with 'classical' harmony (chromatic harmony) as there is, it's never stifled me, it's just tools by which I learned coherence basically. I write freely.

[Awdio]

Theory is helpful for developing intuition, but once the intuition is developed, the music that feels best to write (for me anyway) is intuitive rather than theoretical.

[cvale]

The issue here is partially a semantic one. To some people "music theory" is a specific collection of important concepts, often "common practice period"-related. Some people (and I'm one of these) use the term much more generally to mean any underlying principle in music (although generally treating specifically acoustics as a separate thing, even though there is some overlap). Anyway, I think it's worth being mindful of the fact that not everyone uses the term the same. Usually when an artists says they "don't know any theory," for example, they're probably either straight up full of shit or are using the term somewhat narrowly to mean like "classically trained in formal classical theory."

I actually don't think you can even compose music without some understanding of theory. Even understanding how rhythms work, how different instruments have different roles and how those roles interact, etc. I would say is a kind of theoretical knowledge. In other words, you can think of things purely in terms of how they sound, but there's an efficiency to being able to abstracting what you're doing into the realm of underlying principles. You've got a drum part and you want to figure out what type of bass part to play over it. You can literally wing it and do random things until something clicks, but most people who aren't a complete mess are probably going to be taking some principled approach to it, e.g. thinking about where the prominent accents in the drum beats are, thinking about to what degree they want to follow those exactly or whether they want to syncopate and play between the beats, what they want the overall "dialog" between those to instruments to be like. Those are, in my view, "theory" in quality because you're operating in an principled, abstracted capacity that is distinct from (but obviously overlaps with) your 100% intuitive sensibilities. Again, I have a hard time imagining how anyone consistently makes good music without this, unless they're just churning out the exact same thing over and over again.

If we're to compare this with learning the language, you can obviously learn to appear to speak a language by memorizing enough phrases but until you actually know something about grammar, you're going to have a hard time saying anything that you didn't specifically hear before. This doesn't mean you have to literally study a grammar book and look at conjugation tables, but understanding how the grammar works on some level will let you produce unique output. So when I say there's an efficiency to using theory, it's the same thing: without it, you're going to either need to operate purely through imitation or stumbling around until something happens that you like. Some people are happy with either of those things, but I definitely wouldn't be.

[stoopicus]

To me, learning some music theory is simply by far the easiest way to have a shortcut to an intuition of what will likely sound good. It's the consolidated knowledge gathered by centuries of other people throwing stuff against a wall and seeing what stuck. Don't look at it as rigid rules, think of it as a signpost, not a cop.

Look at it this way. These are your basic options:

- Be an inherent virtuoso. Good luck with that.
- A bunch of years of trial and error.
- Learn a bit of theory to give yourself a framework to think about what might sound good in many situations.

The first is nice work if you can get it - if you are a natural born talent; however, for all but a very few of us, it is simply not an option. The second works, but is very time consuming and labor intensive - probably the hardest method.

That leaves us with the third option. It's by far the easiest, and lets you profit off of the frustrations of generations of prior musicians. As always, laziness is a virtue, and this is clearly (to me) the best path to take.

[stoopicus]

What is even the meant by music theory? How to notate, scales and modes?

These are fundamental, introductory class level things, but yes - these are all theory.

Does it cover ryhtym, arrangement, composition? Sound design?

Yes absolutely, rhythm would go in the first table-stakes category actually; arrangement, song structure, composition (usually broken down in to melodic and harmonic theory), would be more advanced and interesting topics.

[stoopicus]

Theory is helpful for developing intuition, but once the intuition is developed, the music that feels best to write (for me anyway) is intuitive rather than theoretical.

I like this way of putting it. I wouldn't say either can exist without the other actually; that intuition is built or guided by what you have learned (either by learning theory or by taking the harder path, by trial and error).

I do know this much. Without music theory, I would have never gotten to where I am. Because I had ZERO talent.

EXACTLY. Very few of us do inherently come pre-wired with musical talent.

So either you can learn a bit of theory to help guide you until you have built that talent and intuition (and, frankly, even afterwards); or you can take a real frustrating path of reinventing the wheel, again and again.

[Cuauhtli]

I suppose I still adhere to the basic 'rules' of scales and chords, that sort of stuff. But imo all of that stuff is about ear training; to recognize consonance and dissonance.

So now I usually don't consciously pay attention to it but I also usually don't compose pop songs. I'm more into dronal/ambient/just making weird sounds with synthesizers.

Tangerine Dream's Origins Of Supernatural Probabilities is a big inspiration to me.

[Tiles]

My approach: If it sounds good it is good.

I’ve noticed that the first two albums of a band often contain the most immediate and emotionally direct music. Later albums tend to be more polished and theoretically refined, but sometimes feel less raw and spontaneous.

In summary: I feel like too much theory can start to weight the music down and kill its natural flow.

[ksandvik]

I have an average education in music theory (i.e. piano lessons for many years). However I really enjoy watching YouTube breakdowns of classical composer tracks as those ancient ones had a lof of tricks we do not use in modern music.

The name of the game today is to sound original, the more theory and ideas you know, the better.

[Benedict]

My approach: If it sounds good it is good.

I’ve noticed that the first two albums of a band often contain the most immediate and emotionally direct music. Later albums tend to be more polished and theoretically refined, but sometimes feel less raw and spontaneous.

In summary: I feel like too much theory can start to weight the music down and kill its natural flow.

While I indeed get this. I think it is not a case of correlation being causation.

I think we can say that Keith Emerson knew about as much "Theory on Just Take A Pebble" as he did on "Hot Seat". Same with Eddie V from "Eruption" to "Dreams". The biggest change here would be age and experience. Also a push for sales. It is all well and good to make Throbbing Gristle records, but sooner or later the label wants you to be able to feed their execs (not to mention your own kids) so you need to do a Genesis. That said, from having started in piss 'n' vinegar, at a certain point, it was no longer me, so I took different paths. And that, for a more mature person, tends to be smoother. No harm in that as an older person generally should be less 'mental'.

My two cents on the "If it sounds good it is good" thing. If it sounds good, chances are it is pretty solid Harmony anyway. So whether it was noted out by 'book rules', or felt, it is still good Harmony.