Music Theory a must????

[moley]

Originally posted by PollyBass
I find that the two type of musicians are almost 50/50. Some get to a certain level by themselves, and some need to learn more theory to get where that person is naturaly. Theory is only learning about something you can already perform, and do it better. Anyone can drive a car, few can drive it fast AND well, for THAT, they would need training(theory). Some people need to learn the car by teaching, some hop behind the wheel and go, in either case, training (theory) will ALWAYS help you understand more, and improve your playing.

I'm not talking about competent musicians here, I'm talking about *great* musicians. You said it yourself - "Anyone can drive a car, few can drive it fast AND well, for THAT, they would need training(theory)". I'm talking about *great* musicians here, ones that can "drive the car fast AND well".

 

[moley]

Originally posted by wulf
That's why I wondered if a simple 'minority' might be better that attaching a superlative to it.

On the other hand, are you talking about musicians or just professional musicians?

I was talking about *great* musicians, whether they're professional or not.

 

[Howard K]

I'm not talking about competent musicians here, I'm talking about *great* musicians. You said it yourself - "Anyone can drive a car, few can drive it fast AND well, for THAT, they would need training(theory)". I'm talking about *great* musicians here, ones that can "drive the car fast AND well".

"driving the car fast" is possibley the worst analogy I've ever heard for being a musician, please let's drop it right now!

moley, you dont have to be able to be a virtuoso to be a great musician. You KNOW that!

I'm not talking about competant muso's either. I'm not talking about musicians in classical terms - I'm talking about people who create music by ANY means.

Kurt Cobain was a great musician, right, I doubt he knew all that much theory?

There's been many many great pieces of msuci created by people who didnt know sh!t about music theory - they got their feeling across via music to a massive degree, thus making them great musicians, in my eyes at least.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by cowsgomoo
i'd like to float the idea that music theory is something we invented to explain how music works... the idea of a 'minor 7' chord or a 'whole tone' scale is an artificial construct to bring some order to naturally occurring physical phenomena... sound waves and music were in existence long before anyone decided to give names to its various components

Yes, of course.

there's no reason why a musician with a very good harmonic & rhythmic sense, who's constructed in his/her own internal understanding of the mechanics of harmony & rhythm, can't produce something artistically worthwhile... in fact, who's to say that an individual's intuitive understanding of the mechanics of music is any less valid than the one we've collectively constructed IF it works for that individual

Yes, that's true. But if that's the case, then the individual has developed his/her own approach to understanding the music - her/her own theory, if you like. Even if they don't know the widely used names for constructs, if they understand them as concepts, then they can use them - and it amounts to the same thing.

what's more important, being able to explain what (for example) a lydian augmented scale is, or being able to hear it & use it as necessary? (even if it's recognized on an unnamed, internal level)

Of course, the latter. If one is able to do the latter, then as far as their playing is concerned, it doesn't matter whether they know that it's called Lydian Augmented or not. If they understand it, have its sound in their head, and are able to use it - then what's the difference?

My point is that in either case, you do have a concept of the musical constructs that make up what we call theory, and are able to apply them.

But, knowing the standard terms (like Lydian Augmented etc) is still very advantageous because it means you can communicate with other musicians more effectively.

You say "there's no reason why a musician with a very good harmonic & rhythmic sense, who's constructed in his/her own internal understanding of the mechanics of harmony & rhythm, can't produce something artistically worthwhile..."

Of course, that's true - BUT, how many *do* have a very good harmonic and rhythmic sense, and are able to construct good understandings of the mechanics of harmony and rhythm without learning theory? Again, I think we're talking about a minority here.

i'm not arguing in favour of ignorance or laziness here (music theory has been valuable for me personally), but we need to remember that music theory is only a system to help us understand and organise music, it isn't music in and of itself...

Yes, I implied this in my original post.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by Howard K
moley, you dont have to be able to be a virtuoso to be a great musician. You KNOW that!

I realise that. The driving fast analogy was Polly's, I wasn't trying to imply that great musicians actually need to be able to play at lighting speeds.

Kurt Cobain was a great musician, right

Personally, I wouldn't say so. I thought Smells Like Teen Spirit was OK, but I've never heard anything else I've even vaguely liked by him, and based on what I've heard I certainly wouldn't call him a great musician.

I doubt he knew all that much theory?

I doubt it too.

There's been many many great pieces of msuci created by people who didnt know sh!t about music theory - they got their feeling across via music to a massive degree, thus making them great musicians, in my eyes at least.

I wouldn't say so, actually. I wouldn't say that writing *one* inspired piece of music qualifies one as a great musician. For me, it's the people that write and play great music consistently.

 

[Pacman]

Originally posted by Howard K

I'm not talking about competant muso's either. I'm not talking about musicians in classical terms - I'm talking about people who create music by ANY means.

We were talking about great musicians. The ones that far outshine their peers



Kurt Cobain was a great musician, right, I doubt he knew all that much theory?

Great musician? By what standard? It was evident that he knew very little about music to my ears. His melodies were simple, his chord progressions basic - neither sounds like a great musician to me.

 

[cowsgomoo]

Originally posted by Pacman
(Kurt Cobain) Great musician? By what standard?

presumably we're talking greatness due to him having a deep emotional impact on a very large number of people

however, whether this impact is solely down to his musicianship is debatable... you can't discount the appeal of the other stuff you get with the 'rock star' package... what he looked like, his lyrics, the timbre of his voice (my fave thing about Kurt), what he said in interviews, or even the mythology surrounding his death...

some rock stars don't have to be virtuoso instrumentalists/composers... some, like Kurt, have more important work to do

 

[Fire-Starter]

Howard K's Quote
"it's so frustrating when you cant communicate about the music verbally and you have to say "like this one, but one string up" etc... drives me insane!"

drives me insane,drives me insane,drives me insane


Let the church say AMEN!

 

[Pacman]

Originally posted by Darrell Ginese

Overall, maybe the differences between artistry and musicianship are being blurred here? I think there is a difference. To me being an artist is about relating something truly felt inside yourself via whatever tools are accessible within your medium of art, and in the end it's subjective to the listeners or viewers. In my opinion there's no real way to place a value on art. Being a musician is having a firm grasp on several elements of your craft, utilizing them efficently in whatever setting you choose and always continuing to learn and grow. To a degree musicianship can be measured and/or evaluated in terms of technical skill, knowledge and utilization of harmony, etc...

Great musicians don't always make great artists, and vice versa. Those are just my thoughts on this anyway.

Beautifully put. And exactly what I was talking about.

And of course the best thing is when musicianship and artistry meet in the same person (Coletrane, Bach, Mozart, Michael Brecker, Dave Kikosky, Jaco, Patitucci, Hendrix, Miles, etc, etc, etc,)

 

[Davehenning]

I think it depends on the person. This is a tricky issue because there are so many variables.

Does it matter to me if Bob Marley knew that he was playing a Gmaj chord while he was performing? Not really...I just enjoy the great music. Same with Louis Armstrong, Bob Dylan,Sinatra, Muddy Waters and Wes Montgomery.


Whatever approach works for you to get the music out effectively is the right one.

I personally like theory and use it.
It works for me.

 

[tonedeaf]

"it's so frustrating when you cant communicate about the music verbally and you have to say "like this one, but one string up" etc... drives me insane!"

How true! Like someone else has already said, at the very least a basic understanding of how chords are formed is a very big plus, especially for a bass player. Many of the guitarists I know can play any chord as long once they get the fingering down, but don't have any idea what it is that makes a chord major, minor, suspended, or what it takes to make it a 7, 9, etc.

As a non-theory educated bass player who started playing by ear, I was stuck with root notes, wild guesses, or a couple of old standby patterns when I was faced with playing an unfamilar song. Once I learned a little theory (mainly just how chords are built), I felt like the world had gotten a thousand times bigger. Now I KNEW what I could play when the chart said Gm7, or Csus, or whatever.

Many players who don't know theory still write cool music, but I've never met one who has learned theory who wishes he/she hadn't.

 

[OldDawg]

Here's what I see as the summary of this thread...

Music is a language and people use music theory to talk to each other about music. Theory is also the tool to use for advanced studieds. So if you want to be a working pro it is to your advantage to know how to speak the language to make communacating with other musicians easier.

There are musicians that don't read or know theory and some are great musicians. But they usually compensate with great ears and ability to memorize what they hear instantly. So there are trade offs. Also musicians who don't read and or understand basic theory usually stick to one style of music.

I would add most musicans once they start making a career out of music start learning to read and music theory to be able to communicate and increase work opportunities.

 

[lionel]

hi

just to say that when you "work" (as a bassist use to do)for somebody,you have to understand what he ask to you and often quickly, here, if you don't know nothing about theory,you're just lost...cuz' when the whole band wait after you to begin playing, you can't ask the guitarist to play chords for you even if you have the absolute ear !!

but a great muscisian can be man who plays only 4 notes that he composed before !!