Technique ignorant

[mikel]

15 minutes ago, paul_c2 said:

I don't know what you mean, what's "relative 5th type thing"?

The thing is you dont really need to know. If it sounds good it is good, knowing why it sounds good does not make it sound any better. 

[paul_c2]

I know but I can try to help out DJpullchord as best I can with his question.

[DJpullchord]

Hey, I’m new to all this. Humour me!

[paul_c2]

The simple answer is "no", because the key is (basically) defined by a bunch of things, one of the important ones being what note is in the bass. But there is music without a definite key - I can't think of any examples in pop/rock though.

[Richard R]

18 minutes ago, mikel said:

The thing is you dont really need to know. If it sounds good it is good, knowing why it sounds good does not make it sound any better. 

True, but sometimes knowing why something sounds good can make you appreciate or enjoy it more.

There's an old story about the PhD student working on nuclear fusion who finally cracked how hydrogen combines to make helium, which is the basis of mainstream stars reactions. Walking home with his girlfriend she looked up at the stars and said "Aren't they beautiful?", and he replied "Yes they are. And I'm the only person on the planet that knows how they shine".  The understanding increases the enjoyment, not diminishes it.

[SH73]

I have  never practiced technique just learnt and played by ear. 

[ambient]

Each to their own, as long as people are happy doing what they do, that’s all that really matters.

I teach music, it’s a moment I always love when I show someone something; that Eureka moment when they realise that they’ve just learned one simple thing that will have massive benefits to their playing, cutting out the hit and miss of note selection, the reduction in the hours spent sitting down trying to work a part out by ear.

The harmony and theory module of my BMus was one of my favourite. I opted to do a module on my MMus called ‘material form and structure’, which studied scores, and analysed compositions. The theory and ‘nuts and bolts’ behind music is something that’s always fascinated me, it’s really beautiful when you look at it. I’m a little weird though 😊. 

Edited July 20, 2019 by ambient

[Raymondo]

10 hours ago, Richard R said:

True, but sometimes knowing why something sounds good can make you appreciate or enjoy it more.

There's an old story about the PhD student working on nuclear fusion who finally cracked how hydrogen combines to make helium, which is the basis of mainstream stars reactions. Walking home with his girlfriend she looked up at the stars and said "Aren't they beautiful?", and he replied "Yes they are. And I'm the only person on the planet that knows how they shine".  The understanding increases the enjoyment, not diminishes it.

But it could be argued that he ruined the romance in a beautiful moment😋

I am not against theory in music ...I just never bothered to learn it.

I can see @ambient's point about cutting down the time to learn songs by eartoo.

Thanks for all the replies and different perspectives, all of which are valid....it's just good to know that I am not the only one bumbling along on here.😁

[lowdown]

18 hours ago, SH73 said:

I have  never practiced technique just learnt and played by ear. 

I did both in my early teens, practising technique and using my ears. It just seemed like a natural thing to do and went hand in hand for me.

Learning theory early on, was relatively easy, because I was enthusiastic and keen when I was Thirteen...Plus, it was a way into the school Orchestra, which was jam packed with girls. 

 

 

Edited July 21, 2019 by lowdown

[mikel]

23 hours ago, Richard R said:

True, but sometimes knowing why something sounds good can make you appreciate or enjoy it more.

There's an old story about the PhD student working on nuclear fusion who finally cracked how hydrogen combines to make helium, which is the basis of mainstream stars reactions. Walking home with his girlfriend she looked up at the stars and said "Aren't they beautiful?", and he replied "Yes they are. And I'm the only person on the planet that knows how they shine".  The understanding increases the enjoyment, not diminishes it.

Quite, but music is not a definite, it is subjective.

[paul_c2]

9 minutes ago, mikel said:

Quite, but music is not a definite, it is subjective.

So are a lot of things which can be studied and improved upon.

[Richard R]

It's largely subjective. But consider the pentatonic scale was independently developed in multiple countries and times because it sounds good. You could say "so what, I'll just play what I like", or you might say "that's interesting,  is there something fundamental going on there?"

I guess it just depends on how you're wired up.

 

[mikel]

49 minutes ago, paul_c2 said:

So are a lot of things which can be studied and improved upon.

Not really, any improvement would merely be subjective. No such thing as good or bad music, just music you like and music you dont like.

[paul_c2]

Ok no worries. It sounds like you've already made your mind up.

[blisters on my fingers]

On 20/07/2019 at 11:44, DJpullchord said:

Are there any bass lines that don’t contain the note (tonic???? I dunno) of the key, within the song? Guess there must be loads......

Once in a Lifetime ?

[paul_c2]

1 hour ago, blisters on my fingers said:

Once in a Lifetime ?

It most definitely contains the root in the bassline.

[Dan Dare]

On ‎21‎/‎07‎/‎2019 at 07:05, Raymondo said:

But it could be argued that he ruined the romance in a beautiful moment😋

I am not against theory in music ...I just never bothered to learn it.

I can see @ambient's point about cutting down the time to learn songs by eartoo.

Thanks for all the replies and different perspectives, all of which are valid....it's just good to know that I am not the only one bumbling along on here.😁

Dead right. I hope she dumped the pompous plonker.

All this "I never learned enough about music theory to hurt my playing" does smack  of defensiveness, imho. It's simply a tool that can help in a lot of ways. It won't rule your life, force you to play in different ways or "stifle your creativity", etc, etc. It's just handy to have. If you know how/why something works, it makes it easier to do it when you want, rather than hope to stumble on it by accident. That's all.

[paul_c2]

I came across this: 

 You don't need to watch it all (but its interesting for those who get it) BUT watch from 15:00 onwards, it presents a good argument about why its worth analysing music like this, instead of/as well as "feeling it". Basically, it reveals the techniques of good songwriters and is more efficient than a more random approach.

[blisters on my fingers]

22 hours ago, paul_c2 said:

It most definitely contains the root in the bassline.

Depends what key you think it is 

[paul_c2]

6 minutes ago, blisters on my fingers said:

Depends what key you think it is 

Now we're getting a bit surreal - Once in a Lifetime has a clear key centre, it is not ambiguous. And the bassline contains this note. 

[DJpullchord]

Which ‘once in a lifetime ‘?

[paul_c2]

Talking Heads - apologies for not clarifying earlier.

Edited July 23, 2019 by paul_c2

[DJpullchord]

Oh, that’s the one with bloke muttering all over it? Same as it ever was?

[markdavid]

This sounds exactly like me, been playing a while but what I know about theory i could write on the back of a postage stamp

[mikel]

On 21/07/2019 at 21:35, paul_c2 said:

Ok no worries. It sounds like you've already made your mind up.

No worries at all, simply making a point, as were you. Thats the way I learn and play, I have no problem with anyone else's stance.

As for perfect progressions#2 thats fine, but its simply going over what has already been done to death. John and Paul decided to stop composing on guitars as they felt they were getting predictable, and began to use the piano as they had no idea how to play the instrument "properly" so would avoid obvious progressions.

Edited July 23, 2019 by mikel
Adition