Theory versus Groove

[stingrayPete1977]

The guitarist in our band can play for hours on end without repeating a phrase and in different styles and scales etc and has no idea what they are called he just does it. There are plenty of folk sticking their tongue out on this forum because he isnt a reader but trust me when I say he would have planty of them licked in most situations other than a formal sight reading pit job which I can assure you he would hate with a passion. So what does all this mean? Are the readers saying he cant play the guitar? His name is Matt Thorpe (Comes up on Google) if any readers want to have a listen and tell me they can automatically outplay him just because they have theory nailed.

[Doddy]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1015683' date='Nov 7 2010, 08:39 PM']The guitarist in our band can play for hours on end without repeating a phrase and in different styles and scales etc and has no idea what they are called he just does it. There are plenty of folk sticking their tongue out on this forum because he isnt a reader but trust me when I say he would have planty of them licked in most situations other than a formal sight reading pit job which I can assure you he would hate with a passion. So what does all this mean? Are the readers saying he cant play the guitar? His name is Matt Thorpe (Comes up on Google) if any readers want to have a listen and tell me they can automatically outplay him just because they have theory nailed. [/quote]

So........?
No one said they can outplay anyone else because they know theory. Sorry,but you just seem to be getting very defensive,rather needlessly in this thread. All that's being said is that theory and groove work together.

[ironside1966]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1015683' date='Nov 7 2010, 08:39 PM']The guitarist in our band can play for hours on end without repeating a phrase and in different styles and scales etc and has no idea what they are called he just does it. There are plenty of folk sticking their tongue out on this forum because he isnt a reader but trust me when I say he would have planty of them licked in most situations other than a formal sight reading pit job which I can assure you he would hate with a passion. So what does all this mean? Are the readers saying he cant play the guitar? His name is Matt Thorpe (Comes up on Google) if any readers want to have a listen and tell me they can automatically outplay him just because they have theory nailed. [/quote]

On a reading gig he couldn't play one, If he could read he could play for days without repeating a phrase with a enough music,

Edited November 7, 2010 by ironside1966

[Mog]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1015683' date='Nov 7 2010, 08:39 PM']The guitarist in our band can play for hours on end without repeating a phrase and in different styles and scales etc and has no idea what they are called he just does it. There are plenty of folk sticking their tongue out on this forum because he isnt a reader but trust me when I say he would have planty of them licked in most situations other than a formal sight reading pit job which I can assure you he would hate with a passion. So what does all this mean? Are the readers saying he cant play the guitar? His name is Matt Thorpe (Comes up on Google) if any readers want to have a listen and tell me they can automatically outplay him just because they have theory nailed. [/quote]

Thats a little bit defensive. My view is that you cant "groove/feel" without knowing what notes follow on from whatever the current note is. Wrong is wrong, simples. Because he hasn't studied music/cant sight read has no impact on the fact that he can play modes, scales etc. in the correct key. IMO if he is able to pull off all that, then he has a great understanding of music theory.
I dont understand much about physics but I can still cast 30 yards of flyline into a headwind when I go fishing. Never taken a lesson in my life. Theres not many qualified instructers who could outcast me. I just gained an understanding of the Theory involved through a few years of experience. Same thing.

[daz]

Stuart Zender reckons, that not only he cant read music, that he does not even know the notes of his fretboard.

[Doddy]

[quote name='daz' post='1015715' date='Nov 7 2010, 09:03 PM']Stuart Zender reckons, that not only he cant read music, that he does not even know the notes of his fretboard.[/quote]

Great........ Maybe that's one reason he's not done that much work after leaving Jamiroquai(other than his recent Ronson gig).

[jakenewmanbass]

Flawed question, as it attempts to corner the person answering with a prescriptive notion that only one answer is valid.
Speaking honestly and from the heart Pete, if you really want answers to matters musical then you need to be asking yourself why you would ask a question that is fundamentally inappropriate to art.

The obvious extrapolation from the evidence within the question is not that you really seek to have it answered, but that you seek confirmation that your own position on the subject is the correct one, and the only one worthy of consideration. You will rarely find anything revelationary or revealing when you limit the potential outcomes of the quest for information with such strict parameters.

[lowdown]

[quote name='skej21' post='1015606' date='Nov 7 2010, 07:47 PM']Why is it theory VERSUS groove.

Surely I'm not the only bassist on here that can do both, and at the same time?

In fact, it's impossible to groove without theory and it's impossible to understand theory without being able to put it into practice.

You have to at least understand SOME of the theory (even subconciously) behind how a bass works/how your fingers produce the sound in order to groove, so your argument is fundamentally flawed.

This thread might as well be called "Trolling versus Sh**stirring, which one is best?"[/quote]


+1 now thats grooving!



Garry

Edited November 7, 2010 by lowdown

[DanOwens]

My mate Pete used to spend ages listening to Funk and Rock. That was his thing. He always went on about how he liked to listen to good bands but kinda used to denigrate anyone who bothered to learn and practice. My peers and I would always tell him "Learning is a good thing, practice is a good thing, being a decent musician is about more than just staring at a drum kit, so we all have to learn to some degree".

He would always try and create binary arguments but in reality, there is a great distance between 0 and 1.

Pete was a fairly successful and happy kit player but he was an angry guy who would have a go if someone had rudiments in a groove. He would ignore the multitude of musicians who build great playing out of theory AND groove, not theory OR groove.

I don't talk to him much. He's a plank.

Dan

[leschirons]

I would guess that most players on here with a little experience and currently playing in a band of some sort actually have quite a lot of theory under their belts but just don't realise it because they didn't take formal lessons or troll through theory books.

There is a big difference between actually not having any theory and just not knowing all the terminology. Most have some sort of theory albeit self taught via experience but it's probably subconcious.

I would imagine that the two go hand in hand to compliment each other.

[Lozz196]

I agree its not one verus the other, both have their place, however I`ve heard some people who have great theory knowledge play, but it has sounded "sterile" to me, with no feeling, like notes picked out on a computer. I should add that I`ve also heard people with great theory knowledge play that has blown me away with the feeling that they have had. So it is possible to have both. In addition, I also know a fair few people without much theory knowledge who really get into the groove when they play. So, its possible to have either, both, or in some peoples cases, neither.

[skej21]

And we're back to the massively subjective arguments, irrelevant opinions regarding specific cases that prove nothing and of course, the classic sweeping generalisations.

The fact is, a groove is created through practical application of elemetns such as rhythm, melody/harmony and instrumental technique. Therefore, a "versus" comparison is impossible.

The only other fact is, how you learn the elements you need to groove is not important, whether you like/dislike the outcome is not important and whether you've seen sh*t players who knew loads about theory (or visa versa) is not important.

Edited November 7, 2010 by skej21

[pete.young]

[quote name='skej21' post='1015606' date='Nov 7 2010, 07:47 PM']This thread might as well be called "Trolling versus Sh**stirring, which one is best?"[/quote]

I'm guessing you're new here? That applies to many threads started by Pete Academy.

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1015700' date='Nov 7 2010, 08:51 PM']So........?
No one said they can outplay anyone else because they know theory. Sorry,but you just seem to be getting very defensive,rather needlessly in this thread. All that's being said is that theory and groove work together.[/quote]

Why is that defensive? Its not me its someone else, He is not my gay lover or anything. Maybe thats a whole new thread that some people have a better knowledge of theory than they think?

I think after the 3rd tongue sticking out theory thread Im going to stay out of this one and leave it to the exact same people that have already gone over it too many times already in the other 2 threads. I have not stated my personal position and Im getting grief so who is being defensive?

"Unsubscribed" as they say (Or should it be transcribed?)

[Bilbo]

I think the OP needs to think about what they are actually seeking in the answer to this question. I guess its some form of affirmation that you can be a good player by relying on the ones ability to groove without having to do the hard bit (the theory). The good news is of course you can. So now you can go and play Call of Duty for five hours with a clear conscience and leave us nerds to the analytical world of grooveless mathematics......

Enjoy

[Doddy]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' post='1015808' date='Nov 7 2010, 10:11 PM']Why is that defensive? Its not me its someone else, He is not my gay lover or anything. Maybe thats a whole new thread that some people have a better knowledge of theory than they think?

I think after the 3rd tongue sticking out theory thread Im going to stay out of this one and leave it to the exact same people that have already gone over it too many times already in the other 2 threads. I have not stated my personal position and Im getting grief so who is being defensive?

"Unsubscribed" as they say (Or should it be transcribed?) [/quote]

The reason it came across as being defensive is because in this thread no one said anything about anyone being better than anyone else until you brought it up.

[chris_b]

Don't blame Pete Academy just because people have got their megaphones out.

[risingson]

[quote name='chris_b' post='1015817' date='Nov 7 2010, 10:20 PM']Don't blame Pete Academy just because people have got their megaphones out.[/quote]

I think the post was good natured but there's no way the question can be answered, it's not a case of one or the other.

Put it this way Pete: you need both if ever you wanted to play professionally with Donald Fagan.

Edited November 7, 2010 by risingson

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1015815' date='Nov 7 2010, 10:19 PM']The reason it came across as being defensive is because in this thread no one said anything about anyone being better than anyone else until you brought it up.[/quote]
Err Whats the thread called? Theory Vs groove whats[b] best[/b]? Im not too hot on english but I always link best and better as the same sort of thing plus has this thread ever gone anywhere else? I might of just nudged it on a page or six.

I did say I was staying away anyway so Im off to practice my major triads then try adding some groove to see if it makes me a better player I will report back once I have decided if it was the theory practice or the groove that made me the better player.

[DanOwens]

Have you seen my friend? He hides in a White and red ball. Goes by the name of Snorlax.


Zzzzzzzz

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='Pete Academy' post='1015604' date='Nov 7 2010, 07:46 PM']Lock in with the drummer,[/quote]

TBH I listen way more to the singer or whoever is playing the melody and "lock in" with him, and so does our drummer. Our parts generally do become somewhat congruent but it's not through effort of trying to play together, it's because we're both doing our best to do the same job well.

I think the typical bassist "lock in with the drummer" advice is too simple. That's not how interesting bass playing happens.

Edited November 7, 2010 by thisnameistaken

[Vibrating G String]

[quote name='skej21' post='1015606' date='Nov 7 2010, 11:47 AM']Why is it theory VERSUS groove.

Surely I'm not the only bassist on here that can do both, and at the same time?

In fact, it's impossible to groove without theory and it's impossible to understand theory without being able to put it into practice.

You have to at least understand SOME of the theory (even subconciously) behind how a bass works/how your fingers produce the sound in order to groove, so your argument is fundamentally flawed.

This thread might as well be called "Trolling versus Sh**stirring, which one is best?"[/quote]
I'd agree with that.

When I see the words versus or best in a discussion on music I stereotype in a negative way.

Does anyone know somebody who on the first time touching an instrument could groove strong? For most humanoids groove was learned and not divinely granted. Stopping your education at the most basic level of theory and just playing blues and rock is not playing without theory, it's just being really bad at it. Of course that is what the masses want so it's enough theory to be rich and famous.

[ShergoldSnickers]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='1015754' date='Nov 7 2010, 09:29 PM']Flawed question, as it attempts to corner the person answering with a prescriptive notion that only one answer is valid.
Speaking honestly and from the heart Pete, if you really want answers to matters musical then you need to be asking yourself why you would ask a question that is fundamentally inappropriate to art.

The obvious extrapolation from the evidence within the question is not that you really seek to have it answered, but that you seek confirmation that your own position on the subject is the correct one, and the only one worthy of consideration. You will rarely find anything revelationary or revealing when you limit the potential outcomes of the quest for information with such strict parameters.[/quote]
Erudition, brevity and understanding on a stick.

[Sean]

Please pick a category and discuss:

Fish vs. Chips
Rhubarb vs. Custard
Morcambe vs. Wise
Albumen vs. Yolk
Yin vs. Yang
Drums vs. Bass
Sausage vs. Mash
English vs. Maths
Panis vs. Circenses

Edited November 8, 2010 by Sean

[JTUK]

For the OP. If I were putting the band together, I'd want the groove...but I would also want an enviroment that did not make getting things together too hard and drawn out.

I guess it depends how and when any problems manifested themselves..
If, during rehearsal/audition, the gtr or whoever was having trouble getting it and then we found out he couldn't entertain any help with notes and chords and he doesn't know that terminolgy, that would be a deal-breaker right there and then.
If it wasn't as he had perferect pitch or didn't cramp proceedings, then it wouldn't.

So, all in all..first thing would be, do we like the way the guy plays..and then go from there.
If we are in a more formal situation and everyone needs to read, for whatever reason, then you might as well close the non-reading door and pick from that bunch.