Am I a musician, or do I just have a good memory?

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='Master blaster' timestamp='1357319234' post='1921023']
Also I'm sure jaco wasn't thinking music about theory when he played otherwise we wouldn't have pushed the boundaries as he did.
[/quote]


You don't think that knowing lots of music theory would allow you to play more extreme-sounding music when you want to?

[Protium]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1357319840' post='1921036']
You don't think that knowing lots of music theory would allow you to play more extreme-sounding music when you want to?
[/quote]

Knowing lots of theory doesn't necessarily make you a good musician

Edited January 4, 2013 by Protium

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='Protium' timestamp='1357320129' post='1921047']Knowing lots of theory doesn't necessarily make you a good musician[/quote]

It doesn't make you a bad musician either. But it does make you a musician who has made some effort to learn about music, suggesting that you care more about it, which I expect is likely to make you a better musician.

Shrugging off theory as not being important doesn't necessarily make you a bad musician, just probably a very limited one.

[TimR]

Theory does not tell you what to play.

Theory tells you and others what you played and why it fitted with the rest of what you and the other musicians played.

It suggests what you could play in any context, but it doesn't tell you that you must play it.

It's not rules and regulations, it's descriptions.

If you understand it you will be a better musician, if you don't understand it, it will limit what you can achieve at a point.

It's like being a great speaker, but not being able to write.

[Master blaster]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1357319840' post='1921036']



You don't think that knowing lots of music theory would allow you to play more extreme-sounding music when you want to?
[/quote]

I wasn't saying that, I was saying would he have been constantly thinking about the rules of music and as a bass player when composing? I don't think so. He took an instrument that backs other musicians and instead of playing roots 3rds and 5ths, he got other people to do that for him and he took the lead. Knowing lots of theory can make you a great musician. But at the same time being ignorant, curious and inventive can also be a great musician.

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='Master blaster' timestamp='1357321203' post='1921075']I wasn't saying that, I was saying would he have been constantly thinking about the rules of music and as a bass player when composing? I don't think so. He took an instrument that backs other musicians and instead of playing roots 3rds and 5ths, he got other people to do that for him and he took the lead. Knowing lots of theory can make you a great musician. But at the same time being ignorant, curious and inventive can also be a great musician.[/quote]

To be honest, given that Jaco arranged tunes for a big band amongst other achievements, it suggests that he had a better grasp of theory than you credit him with. And soloing in a jazz context requires you to internalise a lot of information. I don't imagine there are any great jazz soloists who didn't have a very solid understanding of harmony - you don't just pull music like that our of your arse you know.

I agree that there are people who've made really engaging music but never knowingly learned any theory. But put those people in a different musical situation and they will probably fall flat on their arses.

[discreet]

If you enjoy what you're doing and can stir up some kind of emotion in those who are listening to it, then you are a musician.
There are certain players who would be uncomfortable about not being able to read the dots, but I'm not one of them.

Neither is Pino Palladino.

See what I did, there? Crikey!

[SpaceChick]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1357322663' post='1921110']
If you enjoy what you're doing and can stir up some kind of emotion in those who are listening to it, then you are a musician.
There are certain players who would be uncomfortable about not being able to read the dots, but I'm not one of them.

Neither is Pino Palladino.

See what I did, there? Crikey!
[/quote]

Comparing yourself to a modern great there my dear friend

Having had a classical upbringing (was a oboeist in my younger days) I had theory drummed into me. I think this approach can make people very 'clinical' about their playing and they can lose passion and flare.

Nowadays, I put the music first.... Don't get me wrong, I like having an understanding and appreciation of theory and I am exploring this again in my lessons. However, being a bassist is all about the groove. And to me, nothing gives me a greater thrill than to play with other musicians, to have a locked in connection with the drummer and to appreciate your part in the greater whole.

Am I a musician, who knows..... Do I have a good memory, unquestionably.... But ultimately, what does it all matter as long as the music is king!

[Grangur]

To the OP:
According the Victor Wooten, the exact notes you play are less important than the keeping of the groove. Any "wrong note" is only a half-tone away from a correct note, so a simple slide of 1 fret will take you back to being in the "right" place. Besides, how many times do you see a sheet music score in "C", but in there, you find a few sharps or flats in the score?

I think the reality is we can't answer this without hearing if you kept the groove and did your playing flow with the others?
If they've asked you back they're either desperate or you're not bad.

I'd say you should enjoy the moment and don't worry about your "classifiaction" just keep on working at it and get better.

Keep on rockin!!

[stingrayPete1977]

Jeez I haven't even got a good memory!

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='thebrig' timestamp='1357312199' post='1920790']
I learnt a few chords on guitar at the age of ten, but never pursued it because I just did not think that I would ever be good enough to become a musician.

But around five or six years ago in my [b][i]mid-fifties[/i][/b], I was the physio of a football club, and the players had put together a make-shift band to play at the end of season presentation night, and they needed a bass player, so I volunteered thinking that they would not be that good, and I wont look too out of place just playing root notes with a few little fills here and there.

At the first rehearsal, I was shocked to find that they were all decent musicians, with quite a bit of gigging experience behind them, but I couldn't wriggle out of it as they had no one else they could call on.

So for the few weeks leading up to the big night, I set about finding tabs and YouTube video's of the SIX songs we were to play.
The crowd seemed to like what we played, and I must have been ok'ish, or at least shown some potential, because they decided to form a proper band, and asked if I would be interested in being the bass player.

I have now gigged regularly since then with various bands, but I don't know any theory, I don't know any scales or stuff like that, I don't know what they are talking about when they speak in musical terms etc... and I've never had a lesson in my life, but I can learn a song pretty quickly just by listening to it, and working it out myself, or sometimes if it's a difficult bass line, I might look for a tutorial video to help me.

I know how to play the original bass line to around 200 songs, although I do like putting my own take on things, but I still don't believe I can class myself as a musician, because I know nothing about music, other that I can remember where my fingers go.


[u][i]So, my question is this:[/i][/u]

Can I call myself a [b][i]musician[/i][/b], or do I just have a good [b][i]memory[/i][/b]?
[/quote]

Call yourself what you like. I would call anybody who can play their instrument, and puts the effort into learning and progressing, and playing gigs or recording a musician. I call myself a musician all the time, even though a lot of people would reserve it for a professional musician (somebody who makes a living from music). But i think the only really criteria to call yourself a musician is to have that passion for music, and showing that through playing. Doesn't matter if you are good or not. You get good musicians and bad ones, but that doesn't matter, saying you are a musician says to me a lot more than saying you are in a band or a hobby bassists, or whatever terms people say.

[TimR]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1357321814' post='1921087']
To be honest, given that Jaco arranged tunes for a big band amongst other achievements, it suggests that he had a better grasp of theory than you credit him with. And soloing in a jazz context requires you to internalise a lot of information. I don't imagine there are any great jazz soloists who didn't have a very solid understanding of harmony - you don't just pull music like that our of your arse you know.

I agree that there are people who've made really engaging music but never knowingly learned any theory. But put those people in a different musical situation and they will probably fall flat on their arses.
[/quote]

This is a very good post.

I'm sure many of you know an awful lot more theory than you realise. Reading the dots is only a very very small part of it.

I suspect if most of us were asked to play a major scale in C we could do it even if we couldn't read the score or if someone showed us where the C was on the fretboard. We would probably also know the difference between and be able to play a Cminor scale.

Saying that you don't know or understand theory is a great misnomer. Probably what is so scary is that it is called "theory".

You don't need to know Newtonian physics theory to be able to predict where a falling object will land. You just need to know it to write down the experiment so that someone else can repeat it.

But then I suppose you could video it and stick it on YouTube.

[Master blaster]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1357321814' post='1921087']


To be honest, given that Jaco arranged tunes for a big band amongst other achievements, it suggests that he had a better grasp of theory than you credit him with. And soloing in a jazz context requires you to internalise a lot of information. I don't imagine there are any great jazz soloists who didn't have a very solid understanding of harmony - you don't just pull music like that our of your arse you know.

I agree that there are people who've made really engaging music but never knowingly learned any theory. But put those people in a different musical situation and they will probably fall flat on their arses.
[/quote]

I wasn't saying he didn't have a decent grasp on theory. Just saying that to me I think maybe he was taking a step back and letting his figures flow.

[Rowley Birkin QC]

Oxford dictionary quotes,

"[color=#333333][font=Georgia, Palatino,]Definition of [/font][/color][b]musician[/b]
[b] noun[/b]
[list]
[*]
[url=""][/url]a person who plays a musical instrument, especially as a profession, or is musically talented."
[/list]

[font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][size=4] [/size][/font][size=4][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]so, in that context, you are a musician [/font][/size]

[skej21]

Kudos to the OP... My memory skills used to be pretty damn good before I learned to read dots. Now my memory sucks because I notate stuff to help me remember it.

We both get it out on the bass though, so we just have totally different ways of being a musician IMO!

[Guest bassman7755]

Playing music without some knowledge of thoery is like driving without being able to read road signs or maps - yes you could get by with a good sense of direction, following other people, memorising routes etc but it will always be much harder work than it needs to be and probably quite limiting.

Its not as if theory is even very complicated, or that the information is hard to get at (especially these days).

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1357342843' post='1921531']Its not as if theory is even very complicated, or that the information is hard to get at (especially these days).[/quote]

I think the issue is that a lot of players - especially bass players - only ever do covers, and they learn them from tab, so there is almost no incentive to understand anything about what they're playing - all they need to do is memorise the part.

But if any of those people have ever busked a tune by watching the guitarist's hands, I bet they learned a bit more about how the tune worked from doing that than they did from reading a tab. And anybody who even just noticed the similarities with the distances between the chords in a blues tunes has learned at least some pretty fundamental theory of western harmony. It's all theory by the back door.

I think the tipping point is when you realise how much you've learned without trying. At that point you're either overwhelmed by what you're now aware you don't understand and you start to dismiss the importance of it all, or you're excited by how much there is to learn and you begin to take a more active approach to learning what you don't know.

I reckon I'll never understand the more complicated styles of jazz and I'll never be able to play a decent accompaniment in, say, a quick bop tune, certainly won't ever be able to solo, but I'm still fascinated by it and I do try to understand what's going on. It's slowly sinking in the more I get involved but it's pretty scary stuff for me having only ever been self-taught. All the guys around here who I see do it well all graduated from the same course at Leeds. If that's not an argument for the value of theory I don't know what is.

[mcnach]

[quote name='Dave Vader' timestamp='1357313335' post='1920826']
where's Inti? I reckon he'd be interested in this thread....
[/quote]

be careful with what you wish for!!!

[lojo]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1357345508' post='1921553']
I reckon I'll never understand the more complicated styles of jazz and I'll never be able to play a decent accompaniment in, say, a quick bop tune, certainly won't ever be able to solo
[/quote]

I've played with a fair few classily trained musicians who know all the theory and can site read at speed etc, but they are completely unable to solo or improvise.

Some of us may be limited by lack of theory but some that know it are limited in other ways by it.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='lojo' timestamp='1357370490' post='1921658']
I've played with a fair few classily trained musicians who know all the theory and can site read at speed etc, but they are completely unable to solo or improvise.

Some of us may be limited by lack of theory but some that know it are limited in other ways by it.
[/quote]

I've heard this before a few times. Classical musicians are trained to read and understand music to a high level, and play perfectly in unison with 20/30/40 sometimes more, other musicians. You can't have one violinist breaking out into a freestyle, off beat solo in the middle of a composition. I think being able to play an entire composition perfectly (remembering the emphasis on dynamics in classical music) while reading the sheet and watching the mental guy flail his arms about which somehow tells you when to play and when not to, is a far harder thing to perfect. Improvisation is an entirely subjective thing, so nearly anybody could improvise something and somebody would think it was good. Not the same for classical music.

[TimR]

It all depends on what you've practiced.

Classical music doesn't tend to swing, classical musicians (in general) don't learn to swing and don't practice (in general) improvisation.

However, the only difference between improvising and composing is one is done live in front in an audience spontaneously (or is supposed to be).

Quite a lot of blistering solos from rock musicians are very carefully rehearsed at home.

[MiltyG565]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1357374801' post='1921681']
It all depends on what you've practiced.

Classical music doesn't tend to swing, classical musicians (in general) don't learn to swing and don't practice (in general) improvisation.

However, the only difference between improvising and composing is one is done live in front in an audience spontaneously (or is supposed to be).

Quite a lot of blistering solos from rock musicians are very carefully rehearsed at home.
[/quote]

Yeah, i've seen the Chili Peppers a few times live now, and their "Jams" are clearly pre-arranged, as much as i love them, and hate to admit that. But flea does throw in a lot of spontaneous fills.

[lowdowner]

Rather than 'if you play an instrument then you are a musician', i'd say:

'if you can express what you are feeling using your instrument then you're a musician'.

Obviously to be able to express yourself you need to be able to play an instrument but it's much more. Robots and computers can be made to 'play' and instrument, but they're not musicians.

[lowdowner]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1357374801' post='1921681']
It all depends on what you've practiced.

Classical music doesn't tend to swing, classical musicians (in general) don't learn to swing and don't practice (in general) improvisation.
[/quote]

I'd not agree with this (well, *someone* had to!)

There are plenty of examples of classical music - especially contemporary, but even as far back as baroque - that 'swings' i.e. keeps a constant 'swung quaver' rhythm somewhere in the score. In pre-swing era music it tended to be written out long hand (with constant repetition of pairs of 'dotted-quaver - semi-quaver' notes), but more recently using the 'swung' notation above the initial pair of quavers to indicate swing.

You could argue that it's not really 'swing' because it doesn't follow the conventional jazz/swing culture, and the players aren't really part of that 'loose' playing highly specialised mind set that good swingers have, but it's still a swing rhythm.

I'm currently learning a grade 6 classical guitar piece that is explicitly 'swing' (contemporary modern) so they are definitely out there.

[lowdowner]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' timestamp='1357345508' post='1921553']
I think the issue is that a lot of players - especially bass players - only ever do covers, and they learn them from tab, so there is almost no incentive to understand anything about what they're playing - all they need to do is memorise the part.
[/quote]

Couldn't agree more. The time when theory becomes useful is when you are either reading sheet music or when you are composing. The latter is really helped by theory.

This isn't just about being able to understand notation - but understanding how the music 'works' so you can make it do what you want.

'Theory' is just a collection of existing knowledge about how music 'works' - a sort of common wisdom - held together in a convenient way so it can be learnt and discussed and extended by other people. You *could* learn it all from scratch through experience, but absorbing the existing common body of knowledge is not necessarily a bad thing and can cut out a lot of time. Mind you, you could argue that it also might restrict your thinking to whatever is considered 'worthy' of being in the common body of knowledge.

When you learn 'tab' you're learning some music theory, and when you learn where notes are on the neck you're learning some theory, but it's a bit of a tip of an iceberg compared to what you *could* understand from the common body of knowledge.