Whats the point of Music Theory?

[Fergie Fulton]

The are lost of questions, answers, arguments, debates, the right way, the wrong way, the correct way, the in correct way about music theory.
To me it is the lauguage of my work, it has taken me around the world, allowed me to meet amazing people, go to great places, and have a life many dream of. It has been my understanding and application of music theory to my playing that made all that possible.

So whats it all about, is it important or not important? Is it reletive in todays music structures? How much should a player know, all or nothing , or just what he needs to understand his instrument and no more? These and other points have been raised on other post and threads but now it here, so come on whats your beef with music theory, pros and cons please?

[fretlessman71]

Music theory is to music what grammar lessons are to language; they're simply a study of how things fit together, and the generally accepted manner of doing things.

Theory is wonderful to know if you have the head for it, and if you're willing to allow for things that sound "right" even though you know they're "wrong".

Theory is important if you want to understand what it is that you're doing, and your ear isn't taking you as far as you want to go (I believe a good 95% of us fit into that category). If your ear is far better than your head, it may not do you any good. If you simply don't CARE about what's right and what's wrong, it may similarly not do you any good.

But I highly recommend that everyone at least give a little bit of effort into learning about theory. It's there to help, not annoy (contrary to what many teachers seem to think).

[bassteban]

Knowledge is power.
We all know bass frequencies require more power.
Gimme HEADROOM.
Seriously.

[onlyclave]

Originally Posted by Fergie Fulton

The are lost of questions, answers, arguments, debates, the right way, the wrong way, the correct way, the in correct way about music theory.
To me it is the lauguage of my work, it has taken me around the world, allowed me to meet amazing people, go to great places, and have a life many dream of. It has been my understanding and application of music theory to my playing that made all that possible.

So whats it all about, is it important or not important? Is it reletive in todays music structures? How much should a player know, all or nothing , or just what he needs to understand his instrument and no more? These and other points have been raised on other post and threads but now it here, so come on whats your beef with music theory, pros and cons please?

Music theory is just giving names to the sounds that you hear and cataloging them, nothing more and nothing less. The music came first and then the descriptor later.

The importance of studying music theory is so that a musician is not constantly reinventing the wheel. I remember the first time I ever heard a Neopolitan sixth chord I recognized the sound as something I enjoyed. Now that I know what it sounds like, how it is produced and when to use it I have that vocabulary at my disposal much faster.

Other than that, music theory is just the nuts and bolts and gears of music. The biggest beef I have with the term "Music Theory" is too many people think it is just modes and arpeggios, which is only a very small subset. You can thank magazines such as Guitar Player, Guitar School, Guitar For The Practicing Musician, Guitar World, etc. for that.

Aside from the guy who is currently awaiting a harmonic analysis of "ESP" in another thread, I never see any particularly deep discussions of harmony, it's application and analysis, form (which is the last unexplored musical frontier IMO) and compositional techniques. HAViC5 has the most interesting posts on that topic.

[peterpalmieri]

Music theory is of course very important, I don't know that there is much more to say.

I'm not sure it's neccesary to be able to analyze a Wagner symphony to play some rock tunes but it sure as heck won't hurt and anyone that is serious about perfecting their craft should study it very closely.

[mike_mckaigg]

I meet so many people who think that learning theory is going to impare their creativity. I always ask "did taking an English class inhibit your ability to form a sentence in your own words?". Theory is our language. Notation is a system of recording. A key signature is not a prison, but "home base". The more knowledgable you are in our language, the better grasp you'll have of moving through different keys and finding your way back "home".

[T.O.Bass]

I've always been of the mindset that knowing theory can only help, never hinder. Then again, some of my favorite artists - The Residents, Snakefinger Lithman - don't know any theory. Go figure.

[Snarf]

To be perfectly honest, you're just not going to find many sophisticated discussions on harmony on a forum like this. The vast majority of posters have little interest in it, because it's not relevant to them. The styles of music most people choose to play require little more than memorizing "3rd fret E string, then 5th fret A string . . . . . "

[Rickett Customs]

I too agree, theory is musical language.
I can only speak for myself, but for me, it is a necessary evil.
IMO, I think every one should learn it, regardless if you get it or don't get it, either way, you'll walk away with something valuable.

[HaVIC5]

Music theory is nothing more than the explicit understanding of music. It answers WHY music sounds the way it does, and HOW to make music to fit an aesthetic. It's not essential to playing music, and it definitely is not essential to enjoying it, but knowing what's going on can add a whole new layer of meaning and appreciation. Just as you don't need to know all the formulae that go into the study of classical physics to know that a ball will fall when dropped, you don't need to understand all the technical details about a chord progression or melody to know it sounds good. But if you were ever curious WHY it sounds good, or WHY the ball falls the way it does, there are frameworks for both systems that let you learn more about the way music works, and the way the natural world works. And that is the value.

[JTE]

IF you realize a few important factors in the study of music theory, it's going to help you no end. If you fail to realize these factors, it's pointless and can be a hinderance.

A. Music theory is an explanation of how things have been done- it's an on-going attempt to make a systematic view of how things have worked for a lot of people over the centuries. That means the "rules" are only ways to organize information, and not to be limits. That's because...

B. ... the first rule of music theory is "If it sounds right, it IS right". That's followed closely by...

C. ... the second rule of music theory, which is "If it sounds wrong, it IS wrong."

So, it's useful to know why ii V I defines a key center, but there's no rule that says you can't use II V I instead. And the cool part is that sounding "right" or "wrong" is up to you (or your audience, or the person paying you to play).

jte

[HaVIC5]

Originally Posted by Snarf

To be perfectly honest, you're just not going to find many sophisticated discussions on harmony on a forum like this. The vast majority of posters have little interest in it, because it's not relevant to them. The styles of music most people choose to play require little more than memorizing "3rd fret E string, then 5th fret A string . . . . . "

Well, it depends. There's a clique of theoristas that often muck up threads with simple questions with obtuse and irrelevant (sophisticated, you might say) discussions about inane subject. Like whether or not to teach the distance between relative major and minor as three semitones or a minor third for example.

[Snarf]

Originally Posted by mike_mckaigg

I meet so many people who think that learning theory is going to impare their creativity. I always ask "did taking an English class inhibit your ability to form a sentence in your own words?". Theory is our language. Notation is a system of recording. A key signature is not a prison, but "home base". The more knowledgable you are in our language, the better grasp you'll have of moving through different keys and finding your way back "home".

I've heard that argument about creativity, and it's pure laziness. I should know, when I was 11 years old I said the same thing. By 12 I figured out that it was crap.

As far as key signatures go, I think their relevance has been somewhat diminished by almost stream-of-conciousness harmonization of melody. I know when I write now, I usually don't bother with a key signature because I'm back and forth between so many keys, writing so many accidentals, that it would be tough to keep track of a key.

[HaVIC5]

Originally Posted by JTE

IF you realize a few important factors in the study of music theory, it's going to help you no end. If you fail to realize these factors, it's pointless and can be a hinderance.

A. Music theory is an explanation of how things have been done- it's an on-going attempt to make a systematic view of how things have worked for a lot of people over the centuries. That means the "rules" are only ways to organize information, and not to be limits. That's because...

B. ... the first rule of music theory is "If it sounds right, it IS right". That's followed closely by...

C. ... the second rule of music theory, which is "If it sounds wrong, it IS wrong."

So, it's useful to know why ii V I defines a key center, but there's no rule that says you can't use II V I instead. And the cool part is that sounding "right" or "wrong" is up to you (or your audience, or the person paying you to play).

jte

Well, what music theory says is RIGHT and WRONG depends on the musical style you are trying to understand and emulate. This is why for baroque music, parallelism in perfect 5ths and octaves is WRONG, but for big band arranging and classical impressionism, parallelism in 5ths and octaves is RIGHT. Rules are just defined as ways to create a certain sound. If you break them, no biggie, you just don't get the sound that the rule was working towards. Parallel fifths, for multiple reasons, don't work with the Baroque aesthetic, but work extremely well with the big band and impressionist aesthetic.

[Fergie Fulton]

Originally Posted by onlyclave

Aside from the guy who is currently awaiting a harmonic analysis of "ESP" in another thread, I never see any particularly deep discussions of harmony, it's application and analysis, form (which is the last unexplored musical frontier IMO) and compositional techniques. HAViC5 has the most interesting posts on that topic.

Great point and i say how do we have a discussion on harmony and composition on-line without writing it using Music Theory?

[WJGreer]

An understanding of theory is certainly not critical to a single person's ability to play and enjoy music. But it becomes somewhat more important when that person decides to play with other people.

Consider theory a "language" that enables people to communicate with one another effectively.

[ysand]

Q:What's the point of grammar and syntax?
A: Better communication, words make sense, phrases make sense, etc

Q: What's the point of music theory?
A: Better communication, notes make sence, phrases make sense, etc

Just change "words" with "notes" and get the "why do u need to learn grammar" answers.
It's the same

[Fergie Fulton]

Originally Posted by HaVIC5

Well, it depends. There's a clique of theoristas that often muck up threads with simple questions with obtuse and irrelevant (sophisticated, you might say) discussions about inane subject. Like whether or not to teach the distance between relative major and minor as three semitones or a minor third for example.

For those who need to catch up, three semi-tones back from the root of a Major Scale was offered as another way to find its reletive Minor by me, as the use of a Minor 3rd caused some confusion on another thread, and one of the reasons we're on this post..to have an open, healthy discussion on the merits, or not, of music theory.

[AlphaMale]

Haha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX1fiE0U1qA

Because you can't compose something like this for all these parts, by ear and still be able to have a successful career. Shostakovich could write songs like these in one night.

[beggar98]

It all depends on two things- what you want to say and whether or not you care to understand why you say it.

If you're in a punk band that just bashes power cords with roots in the bass you don't need to know much about theory. Nothing wrong with that, punk isn't about music as much as message.

What I can't stand is the guy with amazing "ear" who can pick out anything he hears and thus thinks they don't need theory. Jam sessions with guys like that are a nightmare, because they try to play advanced music but have no idea why they play the notes they play. You tell them to sound like Coltrane, they nail Coltrane. You want Wayne Shorter? No problem. But they have no sound of their own, nothing to add to the conversation. Its such a waste of a gift I would kill for.