What Do You Guys Think About Theory?

[LayneGreene]

Lane:

It's cool that you disagree with me because your personal "break throughs" suggests to you that I'm off base. I respect your right to be misguided - especially at your age. But, I know there is a multitude of experienced, fantastic players out there who know exactly what I mean because they know that's how they play their best, and this bullshit from you, "if you're not thinking about what you're playing you're just going to rehash the same old licks you've been playing," is not only not true (every performance is unique, and the best improvs come from playing without thinking), it really insults every single one of those players. Moreover, your assertion that "[t]o say theory has NO good place is like saying grammar has NO good place in giving a speech," is absurd. Thinking about grammar has it's place in writing a good speech, like music theory may, for some, have it's place in developing music - like I said before. But, thinking about good grammar while giving the speech as written, will just get in the way of your best "performance" giving the speech from memory as it's written, just like thinking about what you're playing while you're playing gets in the way of your best playing from "muscle memory." You may not agree with that, or perhaps realize it - yet. But, for many, many incredible players, it is a fundamental truth. BTW, I note that your "break thoughs" came while you were "thinking about what's coming up in a few bars." In other words, you were anticipating, not thinking about what you were playing at the time.

I'm kind of glad you responded in the insulting manner that you did, because it highlights my biggest beef about "music theory" - the arrogant snobs who think less of other other musicians who don't think it's as important as they do. You know the type - the kind that need to start a thread in an online forum complaining that other musicians don't worship at the altar of "music theory" like they do. I think you're a truly fine musician, Lane. And, I don't think you're an arrogant snob in general. But, about "music theory," especially after this last post from you, you sure have come off that way to me, Bro.

This is why this is a touchy topic! and why I was hesitant to post it to begin with. Even after rereading my post I don't see anything particularly insulting, and I'm very sorry if you took it that way. Most of the musicians I know are improvisers, perhaps this is where our POV's are conflicting. I'm NOT saying theory is the end all be all, but that it has uses going beyond notation and composition. There's so many different ways of thinking about your playing, I'm not even saying that you have to be consciously thinking about how the notes relate to each other from chord to chord. Some of the best players I know are guys who do think about what they're playing all the time. Some of these guys tour nationally and internationally, but this thread isn;t about who we know and what their opinions are, it's about how we all feel individually. I DO respect your right to say theory isn't your thing, I just get a lil miffed when people say it's a hindrance in performance settings. Also, not trying to be a "snob", some of my best friends can't spell out the notes in a C major chord, and they're some of the players I respect the most. Not complaining here, just find this topic highly interesting ad I don't get why so many people are completely against theory.

Again, wasn't trying to be insulting, sorry if you took it that way!

[LayneGreene]

No worries good sir! I won't bother rehashing the grammar thing, just woke up, it makes sense in my head for the way I'm trying to put it, but it's early and I'll probably just cloud the analogy more. The internet is notoriously bad for trying to convey meaning It's hard to get people's intent from a wall of text, and people tend to get defensive when they're being argued with. s'all good here

[glissongs]

Depends. As long as you don't think you need a complete understanding of theory to be successful, then it's great.

Most of the hugely successful artists that you know of don't really know squat about theory. And would KNOWING theory make them even MORE successful? Probably not.

[LayneGreene]

Depends. As long as you don't think you need a complete understanding of theory to be successful, then it's great.

Most of the hugely successful artists that you know of don't really know squat about theory. And would KNOWING theory make them even MORE successful? Probably not.

I dig what you're saying!

[Just1L]

I think it's a great thing to learn. You can never learn too much. I'll say though that I don't think it will make you a better musician in the same sense that reading books on how to write lyrics won't really make you a great lyricist. Good things to learn and know on both fronts. But it really all boils down to the individual.

[TapperMike]

An understanding of music theory is of the utmost importance to a musician... period.

.

Here is where you and I come to strong disagreement. To perform even a "Cover" one does not need to sight read nor unerstand things like counterpoint. All one has to do is play the notes in the right order with the right feel. The quartet did not write the music they are reading. They did practice it before they performed. Classical music is very mechanical for the musician.

If they have good technique (which is more important) a good ear to remember what they are doing the rest of the responsibility lays in the hands of the conductor who defines things like tempo and articulation. Once you have the basic musical idea down you may as well be working at a McDonalds and having the order called to you. Rock pop country covers are the same.

The most prolific of the singer songwriters have also been the most musically illiterate. Paul McCartney, Irving Berlin etc etc.

Quite a number of composers in the cinematic realm have also been musically illiterate. Especially the cartoons. They would simply sing or play single note lines on a piano then have the musician either jot it down on paper or try to remember. Theory doesn't teach you how to play a song. It only can go as far as bringing an understanding of the piece for those whom don't have relative or perfect pitch. Theory gives you a foot in the door when you need to write something and a direction to turn in when you can't complete what you've written.

[SergeOfArniVillage]

MusicBanter:

The words "music theory" probably conjures up images of a studious professor type analyzing every detail and note in a piece of music, much like a high school student dissects a frog.

Music is math. There are a myriad of ways you can perceive a quantity, or a formula/equation, and there are a myriad ways you can perceive music. Some form of understanding of music theory really is necessary to create true art, whether the artist realizes what he or she is doing, or not. It's not like you have to know how every chord relates to its tonic -- some people are more intuitive than others. I should probably clarify I'm somewhere in the middle, personally. I know some level of "academic" music theory, so to speak, but half of me is more intuitive as well.

Classical music is very mechanical for the musician.

No. Never.

In fact, classical music is where theory is really most important. A performer excels when they understand why the composer chose to make this particular section crescendo or diminuendo, or why the composer chose to add an accel. or rit. marking, or why the music trains of thought are voiced the way they are voiced and phrased the way they are phrased. There is no room for McDonald's-style performance in classical music.

Do you really imagine this performance would be possible if the pianist did not fully understand the story of the music, rather than "just the notes"? And just imagine how difficult even straight-up memorization of the notes would be if you didn't see how they related to each other!

[Rudi]

Horses for courses.

If you want to make song in a folk tradition or a country one, you can find out most of what you need to know musically (leaving out lyrics) by learning half a dozen songs well. By that stage you should see a commonality about those tunes that can inform your own compositions. Three or four time signatures, the relationship of tonic, dominant & subdominant chord structure, maybe a relative minor etc. Add two or three scales for melody, and you are set.

You don’t need a 12 tone matrix chart, know chord substitutions or have any truck with 5/4 time.

As Horras said in post #20 (where is he? One great post and he’s gone!). Theory is best thought of as a tool. A tool is made to do a specific job. A watchmaker has no use for a band-saw, and a shipwright doesn’t need any pruning shears.

So if you need a make use of theory it should be with some notion of what it’s for; otherwise you may as well be a museum curator.

I see theory as a tool shop. You make your choice according to need.

[edison]

i don't know much about music theory but love to learn from you guys, because i too interested in music but couldn't find a opt teacher for me. Hopefully i will get good lesson from you guys.

[JohnMurati]

my take on theory is that it's useful to an extent. Some of the great guitarists rely only on their ear & muscle memory But I believe theory helps as you advance.

[Rudi]

my take on theory is that it's useful to an extent. Some of the great guitarists rely only on their ear & muscle memory But I believe theory helps as you advance.

 

Right. Also you can learn theory by personal discovery. Its a slow process and its 're-inventing the wheel', but it the surest way IMO.  

 

A discerning ear is more valuable than any amount of teaching.

[LayneGreene]

I think with personal discovery you definitely get a fuller understanding of the concepts. Nothing's more satisfying than figuring something out yourself and really knowing it as fully as possible

[Diane Pettipas]

My husband played guitar for 10 or so years without "schooling" himself on theory. He understood the concepts and fundamentals but never got into the details and the why's. In the past 6 or so years he's done much study and it has connected SO many dots for him and expanded the neck and frets into things he feels stupid for not having seen before - he saw the paterns, but now he sees the designs in the patterns and has come up with his own teaching method.

 

We know some people whom my husband is recording. At first they said they don't need to know theory, it put them in a box so they can't explore their art.  They were 2 songwriters, a guitarist ho wrote the music and a vocalist who wrote the lyrics. Well, as the lyrics were getting written she'd direct the guitarist to go up with her at certain parts. Well this led to songs with 8-10 chord changes, no even measures - even the verses had different measures from the other verses - and left the vocals "stuck" singin everything the same way every time. The guitarists timing was off because every chord change had to corrispond with the vocals, and she'd even forget the songs because of the amount of chord changes. You couldn't tell the verse from the chorus because they were already using EVERY note in the scale twice! Our drummer (who has over 30 years experience) came in as a studio drummer began to chart out the songs, when he finally finished he was like...."ummm...okay, this is gonna be fun".  Since then we've helped them rework the songs starting with the guitarist, taking out unecessary notes, simplifying and diversifying the strum patterns, adding breaks, etc. Then the singer had to figure out how to sing them. She didn't have to change much and found she had MUCH more freedom. Theory saved the day, and they are glad to be out of the box they HAD been in before they realized NOT knowing theory was the constraint.

 

Even as a vocalist I want to know theory, I want to know where my 3rds, 5ths and such are and what scale I should be singing in for a particular song so I can compliment the music and become part of it - not my vocals over some sounds. I AM another instrument and it is just as important for me as any other musician.

[LayneGreene]

Good post Tom

[edison]

Hey, thank you guys for your great support.

[gingeritus11]

I really think it's a great foundation and can help in music composition. Is it completely necessary to be a good guitar player? Absolutely not. But can it help you be a better guitar player? without a doubt in my mind.

But if it isn't fluid, it doesn't help much. I'd say it's most useful as an individual understanding why certain things work and certain things don't. The relationship between chords seems to be most helpful in all types of guitar playing, be it soloing or rhythmic sections. It's all a matter of points of interest. I see it as a way of learning why rather than how. But if you just know music theory, you aren't going to be able to pick up a guitar and be master at it in a day. But if you know nothing, I think it really does limit you. 

If it interests you, it is worth doing. If it doesn't, than it isn't. Simple as that. If you sit around dreading thinking about it, it's only going to be a crutch on you. If it helps you to enjoy what you're doing more, than that's what it's good for. Also, for collaborating and explaining things to other musicians, it makes it all one common language rather then 'put your fingers here and here', I mean that's very rudimentary but you get the idea. It's a tool more than anything. 

[Xenicus]

Everything you do in music is related to theory. Whether they admit it or not is another story. Take a jam for example, improvising music involves theory, adding parts (that sound good) to the jam is theory. Picking chords and changing chords, substituting chords is all theory. Those who say that it makes music mechanical just use that as a excuse to not learn. When my musician friends open my eyes up to it a whole new world opened up.

 

Brian    

[James Austin]

I know very little about theory. I'm largely self-taught, with a few lessons here and there to do things like tell me what the notes are, show me scales, and make sure my guitar is in tune. I play and compose on gut, and do feel as though my playing is completely 'free' and experimental, but I can't quite shake the feeling that a limited understanding of theory is holding me back in some way, particularly when it comes to modes: Locrian fascinates me, and I haven't the faintest idea what to do with it in a song. If I did I'd imagine I'd be much better than I currently am. Then again, technically-skilled music isn't the aim of my game, so how useful that would actually be is open to debate.

Edited December 10, 2013 by James Austin

[SergeOfArniVillage]

Maybe you're asking the wrong question.How about this one instead...."what have you got to lose by gaining a better understanding of what you're doing"?Were not talking about technical skill as much as we are knowledge & understanding.What would be the downside of that?I can't think of one, can you?Tom

GREAT post, I completely agree.

[TapperMike]

This is an odd thing.  While some "claim" that not having much music theory allows them to create more fully because they aren't bound by it I often find the opposite with them in practice.  They usually have little command of the instrument and very little creativity because they don't see the options in front of them.  Then... As pointed out above it's hell when you try to get a group together and right a song as a band let alone perform it.-

 

As a musician you don't "need to be great" but you do need to be solid if you expect anyone to listen to your music.

 

I too had the "Blondie" moment when a producer dropped a band into my lap as an engineer and he said "fix them"  I did the whole arrangement thing and taught them how to perform the song that they wrote.  They hated me for it and fired me. No skin off my nose because I was paid whether they succeeded or not.

 

The blondie moment I speak of is expressed here

http://youtu.be/RAPvlTuN4wA?t=27m53s

 

Fast foreward to the 27 minute mark.

 

If you are off by yourself and think it's all a freeform no boundires performance art thing they stay away from real musicians. They may be polite and simply say things like "that's interesting but it's not where we are coming from" They may offer advice which some can take the wrong way and they may be intolerable as they have dedicated thier lives to making music and see your lack of abilities as a slap in the face.

 

In my many lives I (well to be specific my band) hosted a blues jam. It was a rough bar in a rough town (Detroit) and the crowd were biker types. They loved us but they didn't share that love with some of the "performers" who graced the stage. The lines went out the door and down the street on jam night. Everyone looking for an early sign up and a shot of playing life on our stage with us or with thier own band. When you are performing the audience is constantly staring at your hands. It can be really really scary.  A good blues man can easlily feel slighted if someone with less blues experience/abilities goes on before them.  I've seen a lot of guys who have bombed quite badly and took it as a learning experience gone back to the shed and come back a better blues musician.  Each time they got knocked off the horse they picked themselves up and dedicated themselves to being better.  I also saw a lot of performers who were asked not ever to return for thier personal saftey.

 

Early in my guitar playing years I too had that moment of being totally unprepared for the playing environment (bluegrass) Guys where playing circles around me. I was extremely frustrated by the whole affarr.  Fortunatey a banjo player sat me down and spelled some things out for me. I went back to the shed never played bluegrass again but it made me work harder at being a dedicated musician.