Be honest now

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='Stan_da_man' timestamp='1382355254' post='2250980']
Who uses theory to create music? Music should be a spur of the moment, I just thought of a great idea in my head thing. Theory lacks soul and music really needs that to make it special.
[/quote]
And we are back to the beginning about not knowing you are using it doesn't mean you aren't using it.

[ambient]

[quote name='Stan_da_man' timestamp='1382355254' post='2250980']
Who uses theory to create music? Music should be a spur of the moment, I just thought of a great idea in my head thing. Theory lacks soul and music really needs that to make it special.
[/quote]

Composers I guess dude.

Look at an orchestral score, or SATB vocal score, the harmony is horizontal instead of vertical (they don't use chords as such) giving them a chord chart or trying to explain to them what notes you wanted them to sing or play if you yourself didn't know would be rather difficult, and very time consuming.

As others have said, theory or harmony is there anyway whether you think you're using it or not, or even whether you want to or not.

It exists in every piece of music, every song has a harmonic structure to it. Just 'cos the writer wasn't aware that he was using a perfect V-I cadence at the end of the song, it may just sound like amen to him, but it's a perfect cadence to someone else.

No-one needs to know harmony.

It all depends on how what you want from the music you play. I've been playing professionally for a number of years, and want to progress, I'm currently studying for a degree in music.
I like arranging and composing and would like to go on after college and do a lot of that. If someone asked me now to do a string part for their song, strings are used a lot in music nowadays, I'd be able to, and if they could afford real strings I'd be able to to scores in sibelius for the musicians. You can't give a chord chart to a string section, it'd be too expensive.

You couldn't do that without a knowledge of harmony.

Edited October 21, 2013 by ambient

[Twigman]

[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1382280799' post='2250011']
I can hear the tune in my head. I then work out how to play it on whatever instrument I'm currently using.
[/quote]
What he said.....unless the tune is a rhythm and the instrument is drums - in which case I haven't got a hope in hell

[Skol303]

I know absolutely nothing about music theory. No really. Nothing. Nada. Not even basic chord progressions.

This isn't some kind of sideways boast. I really wish I knew even the basics, but instead I muddle through based on 'whatever sounds right' at the time.

I really notice the benefits of understanding music theory when I work with people who have a good grasp of it (like Mike/Urb), and they're able to come up with melodies I'd never come close to dreaming up.

So the benefits are undoubtable. And I definitely have homework to do...

[Twigman]

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1382356870' post='2251039']

The amount of times I turn up for a jam and the guitarist has written a bunch of stuff that doesn't conform to any structure or key signature, "Who needs theory when it sounds cool man"... ... Coincidentally these are also the bands that only want you to play root notes....
[/quote]
We do a lot like that but rarely stick to roots.....our guitarist often 'tries' to communicate with theory...last night he was trying to work out which key a new middle8 is in...I said that it doesn't really have a key and he conceded defeat...so what key would a passage that went D,up to A, up to Bb,down to D#, upto A, down to C#, up to G, down to D through F and E be in???? whoops I've just given away our latest middle8..

[CamdenRob]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1382365311' post='2251216']
We do a lot like that but rarely stick to roots.....our guitarist often 'tries' to communicate with theory...last night he was trying to work out which key a new middle8 is in...I said that it doesn't really have a key and he conceded defeat...so what key would a passage that went D,up to A, up to Bb,down to D#, upto A, down to C#, up to G, down to D through F and E be in???? whoops I've just given away our latest middle8..
[/quote]

Well with D#,E & F in there, it doesn't really fit into anything as that's pretty much chromatic... You've got a C# and a D# in there, so the F and G would also be sharp, if you made that Bb an A# you'd almost be in B major... but still... I'd really struggle to come up with anything to fit a progression like that outside roots and 5ths...

Obviously though, if it sounds good and fits with what your trying to sound like as a band then that's far more important!

I personally just find it infinitely easier if everyone knows what key we're in... this seems to be a very rare occurrence though!

I also find people say I'm difficult to work with... no idea why...

Rob

Edited October 21, 2013 by CamdenRob

[ambient]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1382365311' post='2251216']
We do a lot like that but rarely stick to roots.....our guitarist often 'tries' to communicate with theory...last night he was trying to work out which key a new middle8 is in...I said that it doesn't really have a key and he conceded defeat...so what key would a passage that went D,up to A, up to Bb,down to D#, upto A, down to C#, up to G, down to D through F and E be in???? whoops I've just given away our latest middle8..
[/quote]

Music doesn't have to be in one key. Music can change key centres through a piece, jazz often does.

[oggiesnr]

Every [s]bass[/s] instrument player knows some theory, may not know it formally but knows what works or doesn't work on their instrument in a particular situation. It may be knowledge that's been learned practically rather than from books but it's all part of theory.

Now some know a lot more and some have the ability to translate that directly into music in different ways. It's all part of the same continuum as some players being able to use different techniques, some have a bigger palette than others.

Even when noodling, we're all subconsciously using theory, it's a very practical theory that won't get you through music exams but is part of the range of skills we bring to our instruments. Even at the most basic level "what key is it in" is part of theory.

Now I know some formal theory so I can look at a chord chart and work out part of what I could play, but actually that's only a starting point. A musical bass line only really happens when I get to play with the other instruments and we all adjust our ideas to make the whole piece.

Steve

[ambient]

[quote name='Twigman' timestamp='1382365311' post='2251216']
We do a lot like that but rarely stick to roots.....our guitarist often 'tries' to communicate with theory...last night he was trying to work out which key a new middle8 is in...I said that it doesn't really have a key and he conceded defeat...so what key would a passage that went D,up to A, up to Bb,down to D#, upto A, down to C#, up to G, down to D through F and E be in???? whoops I've just given away our latest middle8..
[/quote]

The last bit is kinda A mixolydian, except for the F natural, but if that was a single note in a guitar or bass line it would be a passing note to the E.

D-A is 1-V Bb-Eb is I-IV, the Eb to the A mixolydian bit would sound nice and bluesy if it was in a guitar or bass line, flat 5 to A.

Edited October 21, 2013 by ambient

[ShergoldSnickers]

Done without theory. Noodling on a keyboard in fact.

http://www.ianhalstead.com/bc/samples/Orcastrated.mp3

BUT... I'd be able to expand on it and do something with it far more effectively if I knew more theory. And the instruments would remain correctly within their register, etc, etc. And I would have finished it.

[CamdenRob]

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1382367019' post='2251256']
The last bit is kinda A mixolydian, except for the F natural, but if that was a single note in a guitar or bass line it would be a passing note to the E.

D-A and Bb-Eb are both I-IV, the Eb to the A mixolydian bit would sound nice and bluesy if it was in a guitar or bass line, flat 5 to A.
[/quote]

Another one of my pet hates is when someone writes something that is clearly in A Mixolydian then tells me the song is in A.... no its not.. its in D

[Conan]

[quote name='Nick Riffed' timestamp='1382304106' post='2250518']
Music is for entertainment.
[/quote]

Inti?!?! Inti?!?! Are you there Inti??

[Conan]

[quote name='CamdenRob' timestamp='1382367445' post='2251267']
Another one of my pet hates is when someone writes something that is clearly in A Mixolydian then tells me the song is in A.... no its not.. its in D
[/quote]

Yeah. It's an absolute [email="b@stard"]b@stard[/email] when that happens!

Edited October 21, 2013 by Conan

[CamdenRob]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' timestamp='1382367303' post='2251262']
Done without theory. Noodling on a keyboard in fact.

[media]http://www.ianhalstead.com/bc/samples/Orcastrated.mp3[/media]

BUT... I'd be able to expand on it and do something with it far more effectively if I knew more theory. And the instruments would remain correctly within their register, etc, etc. And I would have finished it.
[/quote]

I don't have audio at work sadly to listen to that...

The thing is though, it is of course possible to write a solo piece using whatever notes you like. It's when someone else tries to add a counter melody to it that it becomes difficult if it doesn't follow an established structure.

[CamdenRob]

[quote name='Conan' timestamp='1382367644' post='2251276']
Yeah. It's an absolute [email="b@stard"]b@stard[/email] when that happens!


[/quote]

Yeah sorry I read that back and it does sound terrible arsey... This is probably why I don't have any friends....

I kinda meant it in the context of turning up to a jam for the first time and launching into a song you've never heard before, after being told it's in a different key to the one it actually is....

[norvegicusbass]

[quote name='BassTractor' timestamp='1382299963' post='2250437']
I get the impression that this thread better than we've had before pinpoints what one is talking about here, with "theory" existing as a backdrop even if one doesn't explicitly think in theoretical terms, and with delightfully little (or none) of this "You theorists only follow some rules. I however am free!" bollocks.

My take is the same, I think: Man has developed musical sensitivities through the ages, and one slowly has reached a level of agreeing on how stuff by large works on the human ear.
Normal, tradional theory, in my mind is just a reflection of some shared and agreed-on insights about how the overtone spectrum governs what the human ear likes, and how the human ear likes it.

Since music is all around us, and our ears thusly are trained all the time, in my mind we're rather musical people, and I think I see this confirmed when so many people love for example Pink Floyd, The Beatles or Queen - artists who do not belong in the realm of the most unmusical music there is.



The following may be too local for Brits to get a good impression of it, but I'll take the chance, as I think it exemplifies this more:

A popular and simple style of music here in Norway and in Sweden is what is called "dansband" (dance band as it were). It's not about cover versions of popular music, but small orchestras playing their own songs with a strong and recognisable 4/4 beat and very simple lyrics, melodies and chord structures. Nothing there to expand one's brain by. "Modulation" for example is often achieved by simply repeating the same structure in the new key.

Now, in this setting, the most popular band by far is the one that IMNSHO is the most professional in musical terms. Their songs float like a piece by Mendelssohn, and these songs are flawless if one analyses them with classical theory in mind. Simple, mind, but flawless in the light of what they try to achieve.

Gazillions of other bands exist in these circles and with this specific musical style. What most of them share is a lack of success AND compositions that are as leaky as a house without a roof.

This, to me, is a great example of my notion that people are not unmusical, and do indeed take part in this shared knowledge base - also on this simple level.


So yes, theory is there, even if you're not aware or think you don't use it. Each musical choice is a choice that in some way comments on or reflects our shared experience.


One of the things that make Swedish prog band "von Zamla" so exciting to me, is their strong sense about exactly how much they can break conventional rules without landing in chaos. Their music tickles and amuses, and IMO is deeply musical at the same time.
They confirm the rules by defying them - or rather: defying is probably the wrong word here. How about "bending the rules"?
(If by any chance you're interested, look up Samla Mammas Manna / Zamla Mammaz Manna / von Zamla. They're essentially the same band under three different names.)
[/quote]Excellent post

[BassTractor]

Wow! Thanks, man!

[Earbrass]

[quote name='norvegicusbass' timestamp='1382277644' post='2249945']
How many of you create a bassline by just noodling away to find something that works rather than using musical theory? I must confess that music theory is beyond me ( which as someone well versed and in love with mathematics surprises me somewhat ). I find that I can make up quite a decent bassline when I just mess around on my bass but as soon as I try to justify the line with musical theory I just cant see how the notes relate. So my question in a nutshell is when faced with the task of coming up with a bass line that fits a piece of music how many of you get out your music theory books and how many just noodle around?
[/quote]

A bit like asking how many of you use spelling and grammar when writing a post.....(although looking at some of the posts on the site that might not be a great analogy ).

[norvegicusbass]

I find my lack of musical theory is a handicap when I am playing along to a chord chart that has chords with strange names such as C 9sus4 or whatever. I simply have no idea what to play over this chord bar the C root!! Same with more common chords like minor chords. I mean if the chord was a C minor and I just played the root what makes my bass line reflect the nature of the chord being in minor? By playing the root it could just as easy be a C major chord. I do know about a flattened third in the major scale turns it into a minor but what does that mean? That I have to make sure I play a flat third to emphasize the minor?

When I noodle around I can come up with things that work and I take on board all those comments that I am using theory without being fully aware but I must admit I would love the ability to sit down with a blank page and write a great bass line without needing to check it on my bass

[Lowender]

Nobody creates using theory. When you know it acts as a guide. It helps you avoid fumbling. Do you think about what the grammatical term is for word when speaking a sentence?

Edited October 21, 2013 by Lowender

[booboo]

My theory knowledge is pretty sound, but I'm always in awe when I hear a great 'ear' player. There seem to be a lot of players who read well, and a lot who play well by ear, but the guys who do both truly well are rare. It seems there are a lot of jazz or ear players who are a bit daunted by sheet music, and and many good readers who live in dread of turning up for a gig where there is no book or chart and just being told to listen.
I also think just as it's said a blind persons hearing gets more acute, a non reader/busker (generally) has good ear to finger skills on the bass. Readers might be able to do some pretty complex things at sight but are often trapped by reading and formal musical training into turning off the inner ear to an extent, holding onto the chart like a non-swimmer holds onto the side of the pool.
The best musicians are of course the rare ones that are just as happy reading as they are using their ears (clever bastards!).

[AntLockyer]

[quote name='booboo' timestamp='1382400154' post='2251800']

The best musicians are of course the rare ones that are just as happy reading as they are using their ears (clever bastards!).
[/quote]

The ones that have spent equal time practicing both reading, ear training and all the technical aspects you mean?

I've really been thinking about that a lot and I'm working on every single part playing the instrument. Just a shame I wasted 35 years by not paying attention in school more

[CamdenRob]

[quote name='booboo' timestamp='1382400154' post='2251800']
My theory knowledge is pretty sound, but I'm always in awe when I hear a great 'ear' player. There seem to be a lot of players who read well, and a lot who play well by ear, but the guys who do both truly well are rare. It seems there are a lot of jazz or ear players who are a bit daunted by sheet music, and and many good readers who live in dread of turning up for a gig where there is no book or chart and just being told to listen.
I also think just as it's said a blind persons hearing gets more acute, a non reader/busker (generally) has good ear to finger skills on the bass. Readers might be able to do some pretty complex things at sight but are often trapped by reading and formal musical training into turning off the inner ear to an extent, holding onto the chart like a non-swimmer holds onto the side of the pool.
The best musicians are of course the rare ones that are just as happy reading as they are using their ears (clever bastards!).
[/quote]

The thing is, knowing about theory doesn't necessarily mean reading sheet music. If you know all the shapes and notes on the fretboard and can establish what key a song is in, it is a lot easier to work stuff out by ear, as you are choosing from a pattern of notes as opposed to guessing from the entire fretboard.

Edited October 22, 2013 by CamdenRob

[wateroftyne]

I've been thinking about this a bit more, and I suppose it's down to one's definition of 'knowing theory'.

If need to write down the chords of a tune I'm playing, I could (but I generally don't have to).

But mxylixololdioans and all that? I know nowt.

When I'm playing a line, I'm playing it because it sounds right. Which, by happy coincidence, must also mean the theory behind it is solid.

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1382429451' post='2251907']
I've been thinking about this a bit more, and I suppose it's down to one's definition of 'knowing theory'.

If need to write down the chords of a tune I'm playing, I could (but I generally don't have to).

But mxylixololdioans and all that? I know nowt.

When I'm playing a line, I'm playing it because it sounds right. Which, by happy coincidence, must also mean the theory behind it is solid.
[/quote]
Another interesting point
Your ears and musical sensibility will show you the way admirably because you're programmed with the stuff you've listened to/played over the years.

A time where being more immediately aware of the theoretical make up of the music you're asked to play is when it doesn't follow conventions and puts you out of a comfort zone. Having an expansive knowledge of how chords are made and what notes will fit in more unusual progressions can mean the difference between making a coherent sound and ruining the tune. prime example would be playing walking lines over changes, something I really enjoy doing... we've arrived at Jazz gentlemen. Get the flame throwers out..