Rant on music theory ignorance.

[nuffink]

You can't learn creativity bacause it doesn't take place in the learning centers of the brain. Creativity and intuition is a strange mechanism. More like an anomaly or dark matter we don't understand it. You can't learn creativity.

Just cause you know the all the letters of the alphabet and the language doesn't make you a great writer.

Just cause you know the chemical composition of paint doesn't make you a picasso.


I'd listen to something original and inspiring any day over any scholary music. Yea I hate clasical its kind of anoying and skitzo type music. Too dicki twinki tow animal farm glory days, As for jazz, its ok but never got ito it. and I don't like rap anymore, never care for the stupid dave matheus type bands either

You're an idiot. Picasso was formally trained. Indeed his father was an art teacher.
In fact the only autodidact among the early modernists was "the douanier" Rousseau.
Still I'd hardly expect an idiot who uses Picasso in such an example to have heard of him.

you should be embarassed for being so rude.

I'm embarrassed I wasn't ruder.

[fabi]

that's embarassing... this place can be sad.

[ross g]

Theory is also about communication, a point that gets lost in the "loner in the bedroom making beats" age in which we live. If you play with other human beings, some basic theoretical knowledge is required. I am tired of playing with musicians who stare blankly when I say Amb5, and play an A power chord as if it would do. I am tired of walking over to where the guitarist is standing and actually placing his/her fingers on the frets.
I spent THREE HOURS last Friday with a pianist that plays well, definitely has a good feel for music but could not understand, and therefore could not remember and repeat, the chord progression to f**king "Moon River" for a Mancini cover compilation. Three hours learning something that, with a basic understanding of triads, should have taken 10 minutes.
There are musicians who make incredible music without understanding any theory, but there are far more bar bands, bedroom beat makers, and acoustic guitar strummers who could be so much more if they cared just a little.

i'm just reading through this thread, and i kind of fit in the description you give of someone with the feel/ear but without the training to be able to play comfortably with others in the "moon river" situation you describe...i have to say i 100% agree that people like me could be "so much more".. i've played with guys who said "oh, your playing a sixth and then a 9th or something and that's cool" to which i could only politely smile and say " oh am i?" and that isn't that great of a feeling... i've also played with some guys i may have been a little better than who asked "how do you do that" to which i can only say "not sure...i just practice and play the notes that sound right"... i lost professional opportunities because i lacked the confidence/knowledge a solid music theory backround most likely would have provided....i've been on the fringe of some circles in chicago where i just couldn't move to that next level...that guy in tortoise, john something (used to be johnny machine) played in various bands with guys i knew in school, he went to get a music degree and came back, formed a band, and toured the world...you can't tell me some knowledge of theory can hurt..

then there's the blues and folk and rock and such...but those cats can play....a friend went to music school for a year with Darryl Jones, the guy who replaced Bill Wyman in the Rolling Stones... i guess Jones was like the baddest dude in jazz band....i still prefer Wyman, so i don't know...


rg

[foosnark]

Lets say you needed a really scary sounding atmosphere for a tense scene in a video game or movie - without knowledge of music (and the theory behind it) how will you know the devices to use?

I would sincerely hope that kind of musical knowledge would come intuitively, regardless of any formal training or book knowledge.

I have some minimal music theory knowledge myself, which I don't draw upon much when I compose. But I can conduct an orchestra, for whatever that's worth.

I don't think more knowledge would hurt, but as with many things I think experience counts for more than theory.

[netsound]

Interesting thread if it wasn't for some assholes making fun of thier own stupid imaturity. (nuffink is that talentless stupida)

[vurt]

i have little knowledge of theory,i do however have a drug powered imagination.
what i also have is respect from people i could never have hoped to acheive it from for what i do.
i think whichever side you attack sound manipulation(or music) from,so long as you enjoy it and dont worry about how other people are enjoying it,then youll be fine.if we all like and played the same things it would be pants.but also be willing to learn from the other side too,like i said i have little knowledge theory wise but im learning.if however when ive learned what my little brain allows i find it doesnt help me achieve what IM after then i may or may not use it?

SANITY!!!

me

[contrast]

I think that even more than learning theory in-depth, most people would be better served by picking up the basic terms, learning what chords and scales and intervals are and how to construct them, then stopping there with the theory. Instead they ought to spend their time on ear training in its many forms. By which I mean, learning to recognize scale degrees in context, isolated intervals, chords and so on and so forth.

Once that's accomplished it seems likely that a person would then take a greater interest in the theory stuff, as they have a much better memory, appreciation, and understanding of what is going on in the music in the first place. They may naturally seek explanations of why certain things work the way they do, which of course is what theory is all about. Even if not, though, they'll have a much easier time expressing their musical ideas (and I think they are likely to find that they have a lot more of them as well).

[dystonia_ek]

I think that even more than learning theory in-depth, most people would be better served by picking up the basic terms, learning what chords and scales and intervals are and how to construct them, then stopping there with the theory. Instead they ought to spend their time on ear training in its many forms. By which I mean, learning to recognize scale degrees in context, isolated intervals, chords and so on and so forth.

Once that's accomplished it seems likely that a person would then take a greater interest in the theory stuff, as they have a much better memory, appreciation, and understanding of what is going on in the music in the first place. They may naturally seek explanations of why certain things work the way they do, which of course is what theory is all about. Even if not, though, they'll have a much easier time expressing their musical ideas (and I think they are likely to find that they have a lot more of them as well).

I've learned a lot of theory, but my knowledge of scales, intervals and chord inversions hasn't substantially improved my Tibetan thighbone playing.

[shamann]

Strangely, I've learned quite a bit about Tibetan thigh bones, but it hasn't helped me with scales, intervals and chord inversions.

[sparlecki]

who gives a shit...

you either need to learn theory.
don't need to learn theory.
or need to learn theory, and could give a f**k about it.

thats the ballgame pretty much.
I know a ton of people who post music on here, who know a shit-ton more about theory then I do whose music sucks, and a great deal who know alot about it, whose music sounds like kittens and rainbows...

its the individual, or group together...

[androidlove]

who gives a shit...

i hear ya

[pooshka]

I think people just get confused and think that 'learning music theory' means 'following music theory'. I always thought the essence of 'learning' is precisely just that? - learning what's out there and what it is so you can make your own informed decision?

Personally, I spent two years on a PhD course before (currently on a gap year now :p) and as everyone knows, when you are doing PhD you have to come up with something that will be academically accepted as 'original' - how can you know what you're doing is original if you don't know what other shit other people have written in the past? You can spend ten years coming up with something that you think is brilliant and original but you may be wrong and this would mean that you're just wasting your time 'cause you won't get your degree in the end if your work can't be accepted as original. If you've bothered to spend five minutes on google you will know if what you think is original has actually been done before.

PhD students have to live in years of anxiety worrying about the case where what they are doing now has been done before by some very obscure academic in an obscure institute that they are not aware of. They spend countless hours, days, weeks and months in libraries and internet if there is even the smallest possibility that somebody else has already done what they are doing currently.

Even in this case - it can always happen that someone will publish a paper with exactly what you were saying just a week before you complete your own paper!

This is not even creative art we are talking about here, we are talking about bloody boring academic world but even there people are making so much effort to make sure that they release an original work onto the world.

Now, what excuse can a musician, a creative artist, possibly have in not making their best effort to ensure that they do not bombard the world with yet another unoriginal piece of shit that's already been done before?

[androidlove]

so you use theory to say "oh that's 1 4 5, i can't do that"?

[pooshka]

Just to clarify myself a bit before anybody jumps on me....

I think it's perfectly fine to make music just purely out of your own enjoyment and not worrying about whether it's pushing any boundaries or if it's original enough or whatever.

All i'm saying is, although nobody has any obligation to invest their time and effort to learn what other people have done and said before, I can't think of a valid argument for rejecting something (like music theory) all together especially if you haven't learned enough about it already to make sensible decision.

to sum up this lenghty double post...

"I don't think anybody's obliged to learn music theory, but I can't see good argument for refusing to learn something about it. Learning's good - even if it's just to find out that you don't want it/need it".

[pooshka]

so you use theory to say "oh that's 1 4 5, i can't do that"?

i don't know if this was directed to what i wrote, but here's my take on this anyway

you wouldn't say 'oh that's 1 4 5, i can't do that', but knowing the theory will enable you to say

'oh this is 1 4 5'

instead of saying

'yeah i'm a genius! I came up with this new shit!'

(to which someone who knows theory may say) 'but it's actually 1 4 5...'

in which case the other one could say...

'blah blah blah i don't like music theory. my shit's good and original anyway'