Playing thoughts?

[alexclaber]

[quote name='silddx' post='246937' date='Jul 24 2008, 03:13 PM']And thus you are not open to others' ideas or to a debate and become frustrated because you believe you are correct in your thinking. There is no right or wrong in this thread, only opinon, and the product of influence and experience. It's all useful. Don't knock it.[/quote]

Read what I've written again. My view is open-minded, your statement was closed-minded. Debate is fine by me, black and white statements in grey areas are not. Do you what you like but don't tell others how to do it, nor tell anyone what they are or are not.

I'm starting to doubt the comprehension skills of bassists, it's like we're turning into drummers or something...

Alex

[mcgraham]

Personally, I think theory is great. I also think experimentation/improvisation is great. I think application of theory in pursuit of experimentation/improvisation is fantastic.

I think a few of us have really had enough trying to explain why theory is useful and serves an important role in understanding music, I know I have. There are [i]several[/i] threads that go through this debate and set out the pros and cons of each side of this argument, (see the infamous Janek Gwizdala thread), but it seems there will never be an end to the number of people who refuse to acknowledge that they [i]may[/i] be missing something.

Mark

[Machines]

I accept that knowing more theory would make me a more inventive player, I do tend to stick to the same simple things I know. Then again, i'm happy just being a weekend plodder and don't really need to know anymore than I do.

[xilddx]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='246940' date='Jul 24 2008, 03:16 PM']I am not making any threats, I'm commenting on the bizarre lack of interpersonal skills that are demonstrated on forums and if such interpersonal skills are developed to avoid violence.

Alex[/quote]

Dearest Alex, you telling everyone with a divergent opinion to yours to f*** Off hardly demonstrates that your interpersonal skills are anything to aspire to.

If you are really interested in why behaviour on online fora are different to those in the physical world, do some research. Start here .. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)[/url]

[The Funk]

[quote name='silddx' post='246890' date='Jul 24 2008, 02:17 PM']I thought suspended chords were neither major nor minor.[/quote]

Because the 3rd is suspended. Therefore neither a minor 3rd nor major 3rd would sound all that great over it - unless that's what you're going for.

[cheddatom]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='246940' date='Jul 24 2008, 03:16 PM']Read what I write, don't read between the lines. I never said that theory would mean you could immediately identify what chord was required, I said that if you could do that then you wouldn't need theory!

The labelling I referred to was so that you yourself would have a vocabulary to describe different sounds to yourself, not for communicating with other musicans.

Again, don't read between the lines, read the content, don't make up your own inferences. I am not making any threats, I'm commenting on the bizarre lack of interpersonal skills that are demonstrated on forums and if such interpersonal skills are developed to avoid violence.

Alex[/quote]

I am reading what you write.

"I don't see how you could immediately identify what chord is required if you DID know theory. Are you saying it just speeds things up? In what way?"

Read the 2nd half of that sentence, and the come up with an answer to my question if you like. We can discuss the topic - the point of a forum.


Why would I want to describe chords to myself? Can't I just play them? In what way would giving a chord the "right" name make my playing any better or easier?


I'm not anti-theory, I am just interested in how people think it benifits them to learn standard scales, chords, rythms, and the names for it all.


I think your last point is null. You are the one who used profanities because someone disagreed with you. You created conflict in the thread - an argument out of a debate - the perfect example of how interpersonal skills are lacking on internet forums.

Nothing against you! You can swear as much as you like for all I care, i'm just joining in the discussion

[alexclaber]

[quote name='silddx' post='246951' date='Jul 24 2008, 03:30 PM']Dearest Alex, you telling everyone with a divergent opinion to yours to f*** Off...[/quote]

Dearest however-one-pronounces-your-name, no am I am not. Have you considered a career in tabloid journalism? An ability to completely miss the point and create a furore out of nothing is very well thought of amongst editors of The Mail.

My position all along has been that the extreme views on theory or not are rarely terribly useful, a balanced view is valuable, and a theory can be used as a compositional tool. Whilst you have conjured from such viewpoints gloriously blinkered statements such as:

[quote name='silddx' post='246780' date='Jul 24 2008, 12:34 PM']If you need theory to tell you what might be acceptable to you in a song, you are not a songwriter.[/quote]

I rest my case.

Alex

[alexclaber]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='246954' date='Jul 24 2008, 03:35 PM']Why would I want to describe chords to myself? Can't I just play them? In what way would giving a chord the "right" name make my playing any better or easier?[/quote]

No need to give it the right name but if it already has a name that you can use then why reinvent the wheel?

Here's another way to look at it. Try thinking about any challenge without using any words. Language facilitates the thought process just as theory can facilitate the compositional process.

Alex

[jakenewmanbass]

Excuse the pun but this argument is academic.
There is a world of professional music out there and as a means of communication it utilises written versions of what to greater and lesser degrees, all musicians know in sound form.

Those here that say that the value of that is risible are very unlikely to a ) have a career in music. b ) get very far, very quick as a 'music for the love of it' player unless they are exceptionally talented.

My telling people about the merits of music theory will not make a jot of difference to those whose minds are closed to the notion that it can be [i]any[/i] good. Any really serious musician will acknowledge they are the poorer for it.

Let's just love music for what it is and allow for each others differing methods of achieving what we desire from it. If you diss people that know theory for that reason alone you are a fool. If you don't think musicians can achieve anything in music without theory you are an equal fool.
It takes all sorts fellas

Edited July 24, 2008 by jakesbass

[cheddatom]

Alex and Jake - I don't disagree with anything you've said in your last two posts, but I think that after so many pages of discussion someone should have at least explained to me how theory can help you write better songs, or how theory could help you "find the right chord" any quicker.

I knew a lot of theory at one point, and I think this has helped me get used to where notes on the fretboard are etc - but now I think about it, learning the shapes only gave me a starting point that I could well have developed my ear over time. It took me years of improvising along to anything to get any good at it (i'm still not) and I don't think those years of basically f*cking about on the bass are related to music theory in any way.

I realise that theory can be used to describe what i'm doing, and it can be used for communication too. Theory should also be useful for people who need to work out a "standard" bassline to go with a project they have been given, or some similar situation.

As far as composing, I can't see how it helps.


Alex - I think all kinds of music in my head all day long and I never once think about the names of chords or notes or rythms I am "hearing". Language is for communicating. I think if you're thinking in words to yourself, you may actually be talking to yourself (in a covert way).

[The Funk]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='246974' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:03 PM']Alex and Jake - I don't disagree with anything you've said in your last two posts, but I think that after so many pages of discussion someone should have at least explained to me how theory can help you write better songs, or how theory could help you "find the right chord" any quicker.[/quote]

Music theory can help lay out to you the way different chords resolve to each other - or build up tension. You can "hear" it for yourself too. And just because someone lays it all out for you, it doesn't mean you can then always immediately "hear" it.

But an example of how theory could help you find the right chord quicker is if you are playing a V chord and are wondering which chord to resolve to as the last chord in a sequence (or the first chord of the repeated sequence). Well, Classical theory, Jazz theory and the Blues tell you that you'd get a very strong resolution to the I chord.

I don't know what they call it in Classical theory (perfect cadence?) but I do know how it works. That's the most basic example I can think of to answer your question. My understanding of harmony is not that well developed.

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='246974' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:03 PM']Alex and Jake - I don't disagree with anything you've said in your last two posts, but I think that after so many pages of discussion someone should have at least explained to me how theory can help you write better songs, or how theory could help you "find the right chord" any quicker.[/quote]

Sorry Tom I had missed that direct question. The answer to my mind is simple, A broad knowledge of the entire vocabulary of a language (music is a language) allows greater and greater degrees of definition by familiarity with the terms, syntax etc etc. Having the knowledge opens previously unknown possibilities. There are people that have both talent and acquired skill, they generally do very well in music. ABBA are a classic example two very educated musicians with a great ear for a good tune. Very very successful. Barry Manilow, people dislike him but he's a very accomplished writer arranger and Musical Director (thats how he started) there are hundreds of examples of these people. Burt Bacharach, Stevie Wonder, Quincey Jones, Most film score writers, Led Zeps John Paul Jones the list is endless.

Using the argument 'so and so wrote/played great music without formal training' is very unhelpful to the debate and is worthless to point out in my view, it proves nothing other that the truth about those individuals.
Countless writers, composers, performers throughout the history of music have had gargantuan knowledge of the entire language of music and they have produced really notable results, we are surrounded by it every day. Huge amounts of the music you hear all the time is written, produced and performed by experts in their field. The people that try to be disparaging about the merits of this side of music are just blind to the reality of an industry and I for one can no longer find the energy to try to lead them into the light.

A quick and direct answer is:
If you follow the path of received wisdom, you can familiarise yourself with what was previously mysterious to your ear and grow and develop into a skilled musician that has use of received wisdom. WINNER

Edited July 24, 2008 by jakesbass

[alexclaber]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='246974' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:03 PM']Language is for communicating. I think if you're thinking in words to yourself, you may actually be talking to yourself (in a covert way).[/quote]

I think you'll find that language was the cornerstone of development of the human race, and not just through enabling better communication. An interesting example is how one of my friends is tri-lingual (having gone to international schools where you learn in English and having parents of different nationalities) and he's commented in the past that he thinks differently in different languages.

A simple example of theory helping you find the right chord more quickly would be when writing something that is going repeatedly between I and IV and you want to bring the progression back to a fresh start. By going to the V you step up a strong resolution back to the I.

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominant_(music)"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominant_(music)[/url]

Alex

[cheddatom]

[quote name='The Funk' post='246984' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:13 PM']Music theory can help lay out to you the way different chords resolve to each other - or build up tension. You can "hear" it for yourself too. And just because someone lays it all out for you, it doesn't mean you can then always immediately "hear" it.

But an example of how theory could help you find the right chord quicker is if you are playing a V chord and are wondering which chord to resolve to as the last chord in a sequence (or the first chord of the repeated sequence). Well, Classical theory, Jazz theory and the Blues tell you that you'd get a very strong resolution to the I chord.

I don't know what they call it in Classical theory (perfect cadence?) but I do know how it works. That's the most basic example I can think of to answer your question. My understanding of harmony is not that well developed.[/quote]

I understand that, and I don't have a problem with it but.... I think this technique could lead to a "lazy" style of writing, where you rely on the tricks of former composers as learned from books/learned friends.

If it works for you though......


I have been playing drums and the bassist from the premature ejaculators has been jamming along with me, and he knows f*ck all theory. He barely knows the names of the open string notes, and telling him to "go to the 5th fret" is slower than walking over and sticking my thumb on his fretboard. However, he comes up with some original bass lines that would never have come into my head, and would be considered unorthadox at least in terms of music theory - but it works! It works so well in fact that even when I can hear a great bassline in my head I have to keep it to myself - I don't want to spoil his creative mindset with functions of music theory or musical cliches (however funky they may be!).

[The Funk]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='246996' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:23 PM']I understand that, and I don't have a problem with it but.... I think this technique could lead to a "lazy" style of writing, where you rely on the tricks of former composers as learned from books/learned friends.[/quote]

You're 100% right to be wary of that. A lot of people will want or try to work against clichéd resolutions like V-I but other people will use it in such a way that it just makes the song sound better.

At the most basic level, we're all playing the same 12 notes. It's how you put them together that counts.

[bnt]

I studied a bit of theory a while ago, and tried to take it back to its origins in ancient Greece. You can see the results in other threads where I've gone on a bit about harmonics. We know what an octave is, but what's so special about a Major Fifth? Fourth? Third?

I honestly feel that current Western musical theory can be a bit too much at times. I have a particular gripe with standard musical notation, which is suited to keyboard instruments, but not fretted instruments, and causes all kinds of hassle with [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transposing_instrument"]transposing instruments[/url] such as woodwinds and brass.

On the other hand, without some advanced theoretical ideas, we wouldn't have some of our favourite music. When I think of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterpoint"]Counterpoint[/url] for example, I don't think of Choral music, I think of Yes songs such as [i][url="http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ-XKP7Vd_0"]Siberian Khatru[/url][/i]. If you listen to what Chris Squire is doing in the middle section (keyboard solo), it helps to remember that Chris actually studied those concepts when he was a member of a church choir.

Edited July 24, 2008 by bnt

[cheddatom]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='246987' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:17 PM']Sorry Tom I had missed that direct question. The answer to my mind is simple, A broad knowledge of the entire vocabulary of a language (music is a language) ................................................................

A quick and direct answer is:
If you follow the path of received wisdom, you can familiarise yourself with what was previously mysterious to your ear and grow and develop into a skilled musician that has use of received wisdom. WINNER[/quote]

"music is a language" - is that fact? Music to me is sounds. To speak a language, I must be familiar with every aspect. The more I learn of a language, the more I can speak. If I say "ugh ugh ugh ugh" it may well be considered language by some pedantic wrotters, but it's not really.

However, if I get up on stage, start slapping my thigh to the rythm of my heartbeat, and then say over a microphone "ugh ugh ugh ugh", it constitutes music (no matter how bad), and I didn't need any knowledge of anything.

I am in no way denying that there are benefits to knowing music theory (communication between musicians, creating commercial music etc) but I really do not see any benefit to composing that this knowledge can bring.

Both examples given by the funk and alex are regarding transitions between chords. Like Alex said before, he can find the right chord by playing lots of different ones in context. I suggested this was a method of trial and error, but Alex thought this method was theory. I really don't understand that point of view.

If I have been playing the guitar for a while, but not studying music theory, I will know chord shapes. If I play three chords in a row and think "with another chord this would be an amazing 4 chord sequence" then I can try different shapes in different positions all over the guitar, and find the right one.

Now, i'm not suggesting this happens in all cases, but don't you think it would stand to reason that someone with loads of knowledge of music theory would pick the right chord from the few chords their theory knowledge suggests to them - as opposed to trying sh*t loads of random chords. In turn this could lead to a lot of "standardised" music, based on the knowledge of music theory, and we would never heard anything original.

Originality is not necessarily something essential, but it's one of my top priorities when writing playing or listening to music.

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='247007' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:37 PM']"music is a language" - is that fact?[/quote]
I'm not daft enough to be drawn on 'facts' if you care to explore you will find lots of evidence from linguists making comparisons between music and language

[quote name='cheddatom' post='247007' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:37 PM']I am in no way denying that there are benefits to knowing music theory (communication between musicians, creating commercial music etc) but I really do not see any benefit to composing that this knowledge can bring.[/quote]

Then you are not looking hard enough mate, eg there are lots of examples in my last post, it strikes me that your frame of mind (I'm guessing at cheeky mass debator) is possibly obscuring your view of the evidence. It's all in my last post

[cheddatom]

[quote name='jakesbass' post='247022' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:43 PM']I'm not daft enough to be drawn on 'facts' if you care to explore you will find lots of evidence from linguists making comparisons between music and language[/quote]

I don't think it's a daft point, I think I have raised a valid point. Just because lots of people have compared music to language in the past doesn't make it right. Like I said, I have to have knowledge to speak a language, I do not need language to play music, I just need some motor functions (and ears help).

[quote name='jakesbass' post='247022' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:43 PM']Then you are not looking hard enough mate, eg there are lots of examples in my last post, it strikes me that your frame of mind (I'm guessing at cheeky mass debator) is possibly obscuring your view of the evidence. It's all in my last post [/quote]

All I found relevant to my question re' composing was:

"Having the knowledge opens previously unknown possibilities" (please tell me if i've missed something)

Which I think is irrelevant. Having an instrument and experimenting with it opens up previously unknown possibilities. Having music theory knowledge opens up previously KNOWN possibilities - by deffinition.

Fair point - I like to debate, but that's what we're doing isn't it? Come on, address my points, and i'll address yours! It's fun.

[alexclaber]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='247028' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:50 PM']Which I think is irrelevant. Having an instrument and experimenting with it opens up previously unknown possibilities. Having music theory knowledge opens up previously KNOWN possibilities - by deffinition.

Fair point - I like to debate, but that's what we're doing isn't it? Come on, address my points, and i'll address yours! It's fun.[/quote]

My knowledge of music theory has just as often led me to try something that counters established practice as I've gone with the norm. Some great examples of writers doing this are Steely Dan and Frank Zappa, where all the composers have excellent knowledge of theory and use it to go to very strange places. Meanwhile lots of people without no knowledge write mundane three chord rock (no, not Status Quo or ZZ Top, they are masters of the three chords!)

Sometimes it just seems like you're arguing for the sake of arguing which is really annoying! This has happened on numerous threads where you seem to do everything in your power to not understand the alternate position.

Alex

[6stringbassist]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='247007' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:37 PM']"music is a language" - is that fact? Music to me is sounds. To speak a language, I must be familiar with every aspect. The more I learn of a language, the more I can speak. If I say "ugh ugh ugh ugh" it may well be considered language by some pedantic wrotters, but it's not really.

However, if I get up on stage, start slapping my thigh to the rythm of my heartbeat, and then say over a microphone "ugh ugh ugh ugh", it constitutes music (no matter how bad), and I didn't need any knowledge of anything.[/quote]

What's speech but sounds made in to words, and put into a set order to make (hopefully) meaningful sentences ?.

[Merton]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='247007' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:37 PM']I am in no way denying that there are benefits to knowing music theory (communication between musicians, creating commercial music etc) but I really do not see any benefit to composing that this knowledge can bring.[/quote]
Even if one didn't know "classical" music theory, when composing he/she would know what sounds a two-frets-up, one-string-up position change would make. In its very basic form, that is utilising their level of music theory to construct a shift of a perfect 5th for their composition.

[cheddatom]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='247036' date='Jul 24 2008, 04:58 PM']My knowledge of music theory has just as often led me to try something that counters established practice as I've gone with the norm. Some great examples of writers doing this are Steely Dan and Frank Zappa, where all the composers have excellent knowledge of theory and use it to go to very strange places. Meanwhile lots of people without no knowledge write mundane three chord rock (no, not Status Quo or ZZ Top, they are masters of the three chords!)

Sometimes it just seems like you're arguing for the sake of arguing which is really annoying! This has happened on numerous threads where you seem to do everything in your power to not understand the alternate position.

Alex[/quote]

I think that your first point is a very fair one. I don't think any of these examples of composers are useful though - we could come up for as many composers learned and un-learned, good and bad.

I am not arguing for the sake of arguing. I am debating for the sake of reaching a reasoned conclusion - much like every other debate should be conducted. I hate this "Oh let's agree to disagree". No, if someone has a good question, let's find out the answer.

My question is "what advatages do composers with extensive knowledge of music theory have over those with almost no knowledge of music theory?"

So far the answers have not convinced me either way i.e at the moment it would seem a composer who is an "expert" would have no advantage over a composer who is an "idiot" when it comes to producing a finished product, other than being able to write it down and tell other people what it should be performed like.

It would be easy to say "well I don't have to convince you" but if you read through the thread you'll realise there is no rational justification offered for saying that "a composer with more music theory knowledge is a better composer than one without the knowledge". And if you can't say that, then surely I have a point?




6 string bassist - Certainly, but what are words? A 10 word sentence says a lot more than a 10 note song, and it actually means something practical to someone. A note is not a word, neither is a chord, or a gap in sound. A word says more than any sound can say.

Consider this -

Modern art can be a tin of paint chucked at a canvas

Modern "classical" music can be some violins set up at random, with random bows chucked at the strings

Modern literature can not be ;uhrw.mgnpu;jNLmdnf,tjkwrny Q;EFUW;MNQWE;D [OIIDY;EWFN

The art of language is entirely different to visual arts or the art of music.


Language by it's nature must be organised.

Art by it's nature can be ANYTHING!

[cheddatom]

[quote name='Merton' post='247046' date='Jul 24 2008, 05:08 PM']Even if one didn't know "classical" music theory, when composing he/she would know what sounds a two-frets-up, one-string-up position change would make. In its very basic form, that is utilising their level of music theory to construct a shift of a perfect 5th for their composition.[/quote]

Yeh, we've had this point before. I think we're talking about academic study of music theory, rather than what you have gleaned from playing your instrument.

[Merton]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='247050' date='Jul 24 2008, 05:12 PM']Yeh, we've had this point before. I think we're talking about academic study of music theory, rather than what you have gleaned from playing your instrument.[/quote]
We have indeed! I'm tired after a day at work and my brain forgot! Ho hum. There was a point I was trying to get to but I'm f**ked if I can remember it now!!