Do you need music theory?

[96Brigadier]

Unlike many of you here, I didn't begin my musical journey until I was almost 40. I had no interest in theory (or music fundamentals, whatever you want to call it), I only wanted to cover some songs and play along note for note with the tab. That was fun for a couple of years, but I began to feel like I was missing out on something. I didn't know where the notes were, I didn't know how to read the rhythm, I wanted to play more with people but after reading about going to jam sessions and someone calling out something called a key, that was a pretty intimidating thought. I wasn't sure if learning some theory would fill the gap that I felt, but I figured why the hell not, it can't hurt.

With that being said, I started at the beginning (again) with theory. Does it help me cover songs with tab.. not really, no. If I was playing with a group of people and all we were doing is covering songs I'd probably be fine without any theory. I'm sure glad I'm learning it though, so many questions are now being answered, and I'm feeling close to the point where I could probably jam with others and have a clue what to do.

 

[Mark Ambler]

Theory is fine, in theory.

If you value being able to read a newspaper, you'll value being able to read music.
I studied classical theory, and later Jazz harmony. You'll want to familiarise yourself with modes, Dorian, Lydian etc. All good stuff to know, you won't regret it. Hard to really explain its benefits to someone who doesn't understand it. Although this subject (Dunning–Kruger effect) doesn't necessarily apply, it is surprising how some people believe they are better off not learning theory, ignorance is bliss, I guess.

 

[DJ Bebop]

Theory is fine, in theory.

If you value being able to read a newspaper, you'll value being able to read music.
I studied classical theory, and later Jazz harmony. You'll want to familiarise yourself with modes, Dorian, Lydian etc. All good stuff to know, you won't regret it. Hard to really explain its benefits to someone who doesn't understand it. Although this subject (Dunning–Kruger effect) doesn't necessarily apply, it is surprising how some people believe they are better off not learning theory, ignorance is bliss, I guess.

Yep, as I said earlier, I know folks that have gone through life not being able to read and write a spoken language yet they 'get by' through life.

A baby can learn to speak a language without reading or writing at first but, to stop there. I myself would not want to continue going through life that way without making some changes.
But, that's just me

 

[mambo4]

I think the distinction between "music theory" vs "music fundamentals" is artificial. To me it's all theory, and my semester of college music theory class certainly never got beyond "music fundamentals".

I think those turned off by theory tend to think Fundamentals ="stuff I know and use" while Theory = "stuff I don't know or use"

 

[Droopy_TX]

I think the distinction between "music theory" vs "music fundamentals" is artificial. To me it's all theory, and my semester of college music theory class certainly never got beyond "music fundamentals".

I think those turned off by theory tend to think Fundamentals ="stuff I know and use" while Theory = "stuff I don't know or use"

Indeed. Here's a link to Berklee Online's syllabus for Music Theory 101

If you split hairs between Music Fundamentals and Music Theory, most of the subject matter of the syllabus falls on the Fundamentals side. But, that's just it: It's all part of Music Theory.

Theory starts with the basics of notes in a scale, notes in a chord, and chords in a key. Yes, it's fundamental; and, yes, it's theory. It doesn't have to be fancy, elitist concepts to be theory.

Anyone considering this should realize all musicians use music theory to some degree no matter how formally educated, unless you play entirely by ear and don't even know (care?) what notes or chords you are playing. The realization that you likely already know quite a bit, without knowing you know it, should alleviate any apprehension about learning more.

 

[bass12]

People tell me stuff like it's a 5-3-whatever progression, and honestly - I dont have a clue what they're talking about.

All I can say is that you owe it to yourself to put your learning hat on and get some basic theory under your belt. There's no good reason for a working musician to "not have a clue" what someone is talking about when it comes to progressions and chord functions. Do yourself a favour by spending an afternoon with someone who can go through this stuff with you - you'll be a better musician for it and you'll wonder why you didn't do it sooner. Speaking from experience as a late learner.

 

[Father Gino]

I played woodwinds with public school lessons through high school. I could sight read wonderfully on Clarinet, Alto, Tenor & Baritone Sax and even Oboe for a bit. But playing the written music was all they taught me. I developed the bad habit of not knowing what notes I was playing. They did tell me how to read the key signature, but neglected to tell me why I wanted to know such a thing. I couldn’t play a damn thing without sheet music which frustrated me immensely. I was too dumb to ask the music teacher how to be able to do such a thing. That I didn’t take music theory in high school has been a big regret. I had way more brain cells then. That my music teacher did not didn’t strongly suggest such a thing I hold against him to this day. Seems he just wanted a horn player in his crappy bands. I’m not so sure he could play squat without sheet music either.

I picked up bass with the express desire to play music without sheet music. I did teach myself to read bass clef well enough to make it through 3 books worth of Mel Bay. I quit the books when I got good enough to play blues/rock. In 40 years of bass playing several thousand bar dates, I’ve learned quite a bit about what I would call music theory

Would I have benefited from a more cohesive, classical approach to theory?

Yes, no doubt.

But I have enjoyed those 40 years and have helped make some tolerable music nonetheless.

 

[Playbyear]

I never thought the number system was music theory. By that I mean 1-4-5 and so on. If it is, I’m thrilled because then I did have a tiny grain that helped get me by for years.

 

[GBBSbassist]

Everybody needs to know at least some music theory.

I agree. How else will I figure out how to play all of those four chord songs in 4/4 timing that this community raves about being so popular at their gigs?

 

[IamGroot]

Due to time restrictions I only got as far as page 5 but I commend the OP for starting this. I've read some less interesting replies (to put it mildly), but the great majority was well-worded and intelligent and provided me with more insight in these matters than I already had. I'll spare you my opinion on the matter, thinking it'll be clear from this reply. Thanks, IamGroot (I hope you know what "groot" means in Dutch. I'm Dutch, hence...)
Timon

Yes, thank you.

 

[Droopy_TX]

I never thought the number system was music theory. By that I mean 1-4-5 and so on. If it is, I’m thrilled because then I did have a tiny grain that helped get me by for years.

See? You do know some theory!

Learning more beyond that can come in simple increments. Like, if you're playing in any major key, 1, 4 and 5 (also written in Roman numerals as I, IV, V) are all major chords. If somebody tells to "go to the 6 (or the 2 or 3)", these are going to be a minor chords (also written as lower case Roman numeral 'vi' ('ii', 'iii') denoting 'minor'). The 7 (or 'vii') chord is a bit of an odd one in that it is a "diminished" chord, meaning it is a minor chord with a flatted 5th note.

I digress... but the point is you can learn little bits at a time.

I think it is important for a bass player to know theory because the two main functions of the bass are to (often, but not always) establish the tonic notes of the chord progression, and to outline the quality of the chords (often, but not always) using chord tone arpeggios. Knowing the (likely) qualities of the chords within a given key lets us know, for instance, whether we should play a major or minor 3rd note for a given chord during an arpeggio.

Of course, we can always just alternate on the '1' and '5' for those popular 4-chord songs, and get away with it most of the time.

 

[Groove Master]

For bass players short answer: YES !!!!

 

[Playbyear]

See? You do know some theory!

Learning more beyond that can come in simple increments. Like, if you're playing in any major key, 1, 4 and 5 (also written in Roman numerals as I, IV, V) are all major chords. If somebody tells to "go to the 6 (or the 2 or 3)", these are going to be a minor chords (also written as lower case Roman numeral 'vi' ('ii', 'iii') denoting 'minor'). The 7 (or 'vii') chord is a bit of an odd one in that it is a "diminished" chord, meaning it is a minor chord with a flatted 5th note.

I digress... but the point is you can learn little bits at a time.

I think it is important for a bass player to know theory because the two main functions of the bass are to (often, but not always) establish the tonic notes of the chord progression, and to outline the quality of the chords (often, but not always) using chord tone arpeggios. Knowing the (likely) qualities of the chords within a given key lets us know, for instance, whether we should play a major or minor 3rd note for a given chord during an arpeggio.

Of course, we can always just alternate on the '1' and '5' for those popular 4-chord songs, and get away with it most of the time.

I use what they call 2/4 beat on country and bluegrass., but that is just alternating root and fifth. A lot of that music has 1-2-5 progression. It sounds ok.

If walking bass, sometimes I have to change the pattern to make it sound right. Especially on some R&B with 6 chord or it will sound really bad. So I guess I'm flatting the 5th without knowing why.

 

[Tom Bomb]

The wisdom here is very refreshing. TB gets it done. Thank you

To boil it down, theory can be understood as sound's anatomy. And, without an anatomy, what have you got? To be more specific, it's quite possible that there's music theory in everything. Imagine that.

Even when you speak, you're applying music theory. To get your message across: you're going to be using tone, melody, inflection, tempo, dynamics, and syntax, among other things, before the electrickery kicks in. These elements are at the very core. But, further in, the heartbeat has variation and characteristics that go way beyond just a mechanical pulse. So your soul, your very being, seems to be using music theory, as a constant and intrinsic force. The delineation then, regarding what is, and what isn't theory is worth careful consideration. If you're going to get hung up on anything, get hung up on the music.

Laziness gets a guernsey but spare a thought for learning disabilities and circumstances too. And marvel at the many and varied ways we get around the silence. And be thankful. I'm not a paper man. I wish I was. (Perhaps, one day )

But we all find a way. That's my theory

​

Theory starts with the basics of notes in a scale, notes in a chord, and chords in a key. Yes, it's fundamental; and, yes, it's theory. It doesn't have to be fancy, elitist concepts to be theory.

​

 

[zontar]

If you have played for any amount of time you might know more theory than you realize.
Why?
Because theory wasn't something invented in a dusty old room by dusty old men to terrorize musicians.
It developed over time so that we could be on the same page.
What works? What do people do? Why?
How can we standardize this so others can do the same thing, and so on.

That said theory is really meant to be one of those things that the more you know the more it helps, but it is really at its best when you learn it, and then you just play.

I don't think of grammar whenever I open my mouth, but when I speak what I do know about grammar comes into play--and sometimes I ignore it, but I know I am & why.

Same thing in music.

 

[LBS-bass]

All I can say is that you owe it to yourself to put your learning hat on and get some basic theory under your belt. There's no good reason for a working musician to "not have a clue" what someone is talking about when it comes to progressions and chord functions. Do yourself a favour by spending an afternoon with someone who can go through this stuff with you - you'll be a better musician for it and you'll wonder why you didn't do it sooner. Speaking from experience as a late learner.

I would agree with this. I'm a lot like Joe. I can put a song together from my imagination and record it, I can listen to something fairly complicated that was written by someone else, pick it apart and figure out how it works, and teach it to myself. And I can play most familiar music by ear, on the fly, without any practice, as long as I have the technical proficency to play it.

When I was younger I had a friend I worked with for many years who would help translate what I was hearing into chords he could give names to, and so forth. That was helpful to me in describing what I was hearing and what I needed other people to hear in order to play something correctly. And it helped me to slowly learn language about what I was doing that I could describe to others.

But in the past decade I've found myself digging into things like the Nashville numbers and playing walking bass for standards from charts. I've learned that certain chord types translate into certain scale patterns that can be played, and so on. So yeah, that's theory, learned on the fly, and the more comfortable I get with reading those charts, the easier it is for me to play from them.

There's still a lot I don't know, but this has been helpful to me, and it's not really something I had to study in order to learn. I just had to play using these tools and the information became obvious over time. Practice and doing are the best teachers for someone like me.

 

[IamGroot]

Due to time restrictions I only got as far as page 5 but I commend the OP for starting this. I've read some less interesting replies (to put it mildly), but the great majority was well-worded and intelligent and provided me with more insight in these matters than I already had. I'll spare you my opinion on the matter, thinking it'll be clear from this reply. Thanks, IamGroot (I hope you know what "groot" means in Dutch. I'm Dutch, hence...)
Timon

I can read Dutch slowly., but forget about speaking it. One of my roommates at work is from Rotterdam, and we find German and Dutch are hit n miss. I have a lovely dutch daughter in law PhD. When she or family are visiting, we revert to English. I am Groot sounds better than I am Gross, but not as good as I am Grooch (its russian).

My favorite dutch word is Meeren- something. Needs to be in the American vocabulary.

 

[Jim Carr]

The distinction between "fundamentals" and theory is vague at best. For example the book "Fundamentals of Music Theory" written by Bertrand Howard is described by the author as "an introduction to the mechanics of Western music theory. Topics covered include: notation, rhythm, meter, and time signatures, scales, intervals, key signatures and triads." The university of Edinburgh offers a course in "the fundamentals of music theory"...

Indeed, the list "notation, rhythm, meter, and time signatures, scales, intervals, key signatures and triads" could still remain Music Fundamentals even if you add seventh chords, basic 4-part voice leading, figured bass, roman numeral analysis, harmonization of a melody, keyboard fundamentals, 1, 2, and 4 part dictation, sight singing, and species counterpoint in two parts. Essentially the first four or five semesters of a music degree.

Those are the things needed at a minimum to even understand what a "theory" is in music. The term "music theory" as used by most people conveys total ignorance of music theory. Sorry folks, it's true.

 

[Turnaround]

The term "music theory" as used by most people conveys total ignorance of music theory. Sorry folks, it's true.

Well said. And it's a shame one feels the need to apologize for such a statement. It's so often taken as being elitist.

 

[SteveCS]

Indeed. Here's a link to Berklee Online's syllabus for Music Theory 101

If you split hairs between Music Fundamentals and Music Theory, most of the subject matter of the syllabus falls on the Fundamentals side. But, that's just it: It's all part of Music Theory.

Theory starts with the basics of notes in a scale, notes in a chord, and chords in a key. Yes, it's fundamental; and, yes, it's theory. It doesn't have to be fancy, elitist concepts to be theory.

Anyone considering this should realize all musicians use music theory to some degree no matter how formally educated, unless you play entirely by ear and don't even know (care?) what notes or chords you are playing. The realization that you likely already know quite a bit, without knowing you know it, should alleviate any apprehension about learning more.

But a coffee's-worth of change from $1500? Just to get off the starting block. Really?