How important is theory and reading to you??

[JakeBrownBass]

Ok guy,

I've been reading different things about how important it is to read, and to know how to get from one chord to another etc...

Just wanted to know what your opinions are, and what do you think is most important.

Personally,

I've done up to my grade 6 in theory, but i did this while i was at school/college and tbh i don't feel its aided me very much.
I can read to a certain extent but would say i'm a good sight reader. I'd really like to sit down and learn properly though!
Give me a chord chart on the other hand, and i rarely have a problem.
I can walk a bit, but make the occasional mistakes.

Saying all this though, i rarely use it!
I much prefer listening to some thing and just playing with it, ye i make mistakes sometimes but i feel it trains you so much more than sitting and learning how to read!

I know for alot of people its essential to read music to get the gigs you play.


So ye, jsut wanted other guys views.

edit.

Sorry about rambling on

Edited January 22, 2009 by jake_tenfloors

[s_u_y_*]

I do think it is important to have at least a basic understand of reading and theory. I think it helps you understand the construction of music a lot, i.e. harmony, counting, etc. At grade 6, sounds like your fine.

[burno70]

I learned to sight read so I could play some classical songs that I liked when I first learned to play the bass and this became invaluble when I did my music degree later on. To be fair I hardly ever use it now. Although occaisionally if I come up with a tune and have no means of recording it I'll jot it down on a scrap of paper.

I still find theory handy when I'm writing songs , I may look to go to a 5th say or work out the notes of a minor 9th or whatever to add something to a song.

But that's about it really.

No students have ever taken up the offer of me teaching them proper theory.
Useful but by no means compulsory.

[thisnameistaken]

I never need to (or want to) read, don't think I could it any more if the situation arose.

As for knowing about harmony, well that's indispensable. I'm not still coming up with songs that were as crap as they were when I was 16, so clearly I've learned and applied some knowledge!

It's hard to argue against knowing what you're doing. Often I'll take something along to rehearsals that just doesn't work out, so being able to replace parts on-the-fly quickly, or run through a bunch of candidate ideas based on knowledge rather than guesswork, avoids a lot of sheepish messing about.

[Musky]

[quote name='jake_tenfloors' post='388752' date='Jan 22 2009, 05:09 PM']Ok guy,

I've been reading different things about how important it is to read, and to know how to get from one chord to another etc...[/quote]

[Backs slowly out of thread, and then runs for cover...] :ph34r:

[acidbass]

There's actually a really interesting discussion going on which contains the merits of reading against listening [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=38697"]HERE[/url]. Definitely worth a look, it has certainly expanded my preconceptions of both techniques.

[iamthewalrus]

Having an understanding of theory & being able to read (in my opinion) is an important part of being a musician. I'm not a great sight reader by any strectch of the imagination (still a work in progress), but knowing the difference between a C7 & a Cmin7b5 is still important when you're on a gig.

Just my 2p's worth...

Cheers,
iamthewalrus

[The Funk]

I'm an awful reader but have a reasonable understanding of harmony and rhythm. It's the weak reading skills that are holding back my development now.

[TKenrick]

Personally I find that reading allows me to take certain gigs that I wouldn't otherwise get, particularly short-notice dep stuff. I generally loathe rehearsing, particularly for covers gigs, so I like being able to turn up at a venue, meet the band play through some charts, take the money and go home. Job done. I understand that reading isn't for everyone and I know plenty of great players who don't 'do' dots, but for the kind of work that I want to do it's fairly essential.

As for knowing theory, there is no excuse, apart from pure laziness.

[Bilbo]

In an effort to earn the 2009 'most popular forum member' Oscar....

Most people don't need reading or theory because most music that is played in most venues by most people is actually very basic/simple/repetetive/undemanding (I know; I have played it throughout my career). People can get by because there is nothing to test them. They can use their ears because there is not that much in the way of real harmonic movement that will test these skills to any real exent. The audience reaction rewards this mediocrity; the more sophisticated the music, the more the punters struggle. Not their fault but its a fact.

The benefits of reading are obvious; it comes in two types, reading and sight reading. Whilst I can do both, my sight reading is undermined by a lack of real opportunities to do so (it is a muscle that is wasting). But being able to read and write charts allows you to cover all sorts of bases that you might struggle with otherwise. You can communicate ideas reallly easily and interpret those of others with less need for repetitious run throughs and without the logistics problems of endless rehearsals. You can learn more quickly. You can play in more situations without having to 'learn' sets. Its a skill that can open doors if you want it to.

Theory is invaluable if you want to move beyond trained monkey status. Doing it is one thing. Knowing what you are doing is another. My theoretical knowledge, despite being better than most, is not what it should be and I am trying hard to address this but, without it, I couldn't play half the gigs I do. I love the sounds of music and want to know what makes things work. Its not just about bass. I want to challange the pianists, saxophone players and guitarists I play with. I want to arrange big bands charts and string quartets; not because they are lucrative but because they are there. Without theory, I would be doing jigsaws without the lid. With theory, I have more potential to create.

But that's just me.

I am always suspicious of people that advocate ignorance. It jut doesn't compute.

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='389003' date='Jan 22 2009, 08:41 PM']In an effort to earn the 2009 'most popular forum member' Oscar....

Most people don't need reading or theory because most music that is played in most venues by most people is actually very basic/simple/repetetive/undemanding (I know; I have played it throughout my career). People can get by because there is nothing to test them. They can use their ears because there is not that much in the way of real harmonic movement that will test these skills to any real exent. The audience reaction rewards this mediocrity; the more sophisticated the music, the more the punters struggle. Not their fault but its a fact.

The benefits of reading are obvious; it comes in two types, reading and sight reading. Whilst I can do both, my sight reading is undermined by a lack of real opportunities to do so (it is a muscle that is wasting). But being able to read and write charts allows you to cover all sorts of bases that you might struggle with otherwise. You can communicate ideas reallly easily and interpret those of others with less need for repetitious run throughs and without the logistics problems of endless rehearsals. You can learn more quickly. You can play in more situations without having to 'learn' sets. Its a skill that can open doors if you want it to.

Theory is invaluable if you want to move beyond trained monkey status. Doing it is one thing. Knowing what you are doing is another. My theoretical knowledge, despite being better than most, is not what it should be and I am trying hard to address this but, without it, I couldn't play half the gigs I do. I love the sounds of music and want to know what makes things work. Its not just about bass. I want to challange the pianists, saxophone players and guitarists I play with. I want to arrange big bands charts and string quartets; not because they are lucrative but because they are there. Without theory, I would be doing jigsaws without the lid. With theory, I have more potential to create.

But that's just me.

I am always suspicious of people that advocate ignorance. It jut doesn't compute.[/quote]

God forbid I ever get stuck in a lift with you.

[Josh]

It's a fine line.

I as well have done theory throughout school and college and wrestled with it constantly and still do. I failed my Grade 5 theory in my last year (Even though I thought I was doing well throughout the test) and have barely thought about stuff like enharmonic equivalents and intervals and all of the other lark. I tried to bring some of my very basic theory understanding into my playing in college but I would just trip up and get lost and ultimatley frustrated.

Like many, I can read, but awfully slow. I can't for the life of me play the correct rhythms whilst trying to find the right note either, and I'm greatly envious of those who can without blinking, though at the same time I'm glad I can't. I have played with many musicians who are fantastic readers and great players, but I have noticed that those who depend on sheet music to be able to play a song have a very robotic esque approach in their playing. They lack natural feel, it's definetly not natural when your told how to play. They also lack confidence in just a light hearted jam. Obviously this is just from my experience so please don't take it too seriosuly.

The better musicians on my course were the ones who could read chord charts and would always end up just putting them to one side the next day. I can read and play to a chord chart fine, obviously a few fluffs but hey were not all Bilbo.

I've also asked alot of the bassists I know how competent they are with theory, and too my surprise alot of them are in the same boat as me. They choose to learn the songs by ear and note any tricky chord changes if need be, instead of just showing up with a file of sheet music and basically just hope everyone else is on the same level.

To any pedantic reader that is basically blagging it, which is a sin I guess, but I can respect the fact that knowing more theory will expand my abilities, but as far as I'm concerned, their are just as many bassists out there who can kind of read and don't treat every gig as a test of musical arithmetic as there are die hard Sheet fiends. It's a sobering thought when I see how much people stress over theory.

I'm happy with the sheet of modes I've got written by Dave Savage, it has been a great help and I continue to look back it. The best way I find learning theory is to watch whichever bassist appeals and just first work out what their playing and then figure out the maths later.

Edited January 22, 2009 by Josh

[Prosebass]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='389003' date='Jan 22 2009, 08:41 PM']In an effort to earn the 2009 'most popular forum member' Oscar....

Theory is invaluable if you want to move beyond trained monkey status. Doing it is one thing. Knowing what you are doing is another.[/quote]

Trained monkeys have been the bedrock of many a good band.....
[attachment=19076:Pbass01.jpg]

And with comments like that I won't be voting for you in the "Oscars"....

[qed]

if you understand what you are doing then it simply gives you more options when you are creating and you will know 'what' to play quicker than trial and error .. it is a double edged sword though.. be aware of not shackling yourself by the theory.. keep trying mad stuff (turn your brain off).. also it gives you more confidence so that when some plonker says 'ooh that was a bum note' you can say 'well actually i put that in deliberately cos i like the sound of the tension created by the flat five against the tonic' and all that guff.. you know what they say.. if you make a mistake play it twice..then everyone thinks its deliberate (jazz!)

[velvetkevorkian]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='389003' date='Jan 22 2009, 08:41 PM']In an effort to earn the 2009 'most popular forum member' Oscar....

Most people don't need reading or theory because most music that is played in most venues by most people is actually very basic/simple/repetetive/undemanding (I know; I have played it throughout my career). People can get by because there is nothing to test them. They can use their ears because there is not that much in the way of real harmonic movement that will test these skills to any real exent. The audience reaction rewards this mediocrity; the more sophisticated the music, the more the punters struggle. Not their fault but its a fact.

The benefits of reading are obvious; it comes in two types, reading and sight reading. Whilst I can do both, my sight reading is undermined by a lack of real opportunities to do so (it is a muscle that is wasting). But being able to read and write charts allows you to cover all sorts of bases that you might struggle with otherwise. You can communicate ideas reallly easily and interpret those of others with less need for repetitious run throughs and without the logistics problems of endless rehearsals. You can learn more quickly. You can play in more situations without having to 'learn' sets. Its a skill that can open doors if you want it to.

Theory is invaluable if you want to move beyond trained monkey status. Doing it is one thing. Knowing what you are doing is another. My theoretical knowledge, despite being better than most, is not what it should be and I am trying hard to address this but, without it, I couldn't play half the gigs I do. I love the sounds of music and want to know what makes things work. Its not just about bass. I want to challange the pianists, saxophone players and guitarists I play with. I want to arrange big bands charts and string quartets; not because they are lucrative but because they are there. Without theory, I would be doing jigsaws without the lid. With theory, I have more potential to create.

But that's just me.

I am always suspicious of people that advocate ignorance. It jut doesn't compute.[/quote]
+approximately 9 million.

The main thing I'm working on right now is my reading, so I'd say its quite important to me.

[Buzz]

They're both fairly important.

I really need to start theory learning properly rather than the occasional dabble, and reading is reading. I can some some basic reading of treble clef thanks to playing the Trumpet back at the start of my teens, but nothing more than basic stuff, occasionally I dabble to keep a hand in so to speak by either finding a piece and playing from clef or transcribing, be damned if I could do rthymn with it as I've forgotten the length of the crochetts, quavers etc (full? half? quater? 8th? etc), so I need to hear the music as well.

This forum is a goldmine for that info though.

[DanOwens]

i learnt a lot of theory and continue to do so. I use it all on a daily basis.

I find it invaluable. reading less so.

Dan

[Eight]

I suppose I'd class myself as an advocate of reading notation and studying music theory; not a zealot - happy to leave people to do what they want really.

On the reading side, when paper is called for then I just plain prefer notation over tab. I love all the extra info (dynamics, rhythms etc.). Since I don't gig on any instrument, 90% of my song learning is done just for amusement - and after a day or two I'll probably never play that tune again. So I don't want to have to listen to the record ten thousand times to work out which bit of the song the tab "riff" refers to or what's being played and what the rhythms are. I don't need to commit that info to memory - being able to read the rhythm off the sheet is good enough.

I've still got so much theory I need to make time for - but every bit I learn gives me new insight. It helps me when I try to write something and if I'm looking at a favourite musician/band then it isn't enough for me just to play what they've written - I want to know exactly what they're doing, why they're doing it, what the effects are on the audience, how it all combines with the other instruments. etc. I'm the kind of guy who also tracks my favourite musicians back through their influences to get that little bit more info. I want to take all that I like about them and make that some small part of me. *I* can't do that just by listening, I need to apply some analysis to it.

*Phew* Bit of a release there.

[7string]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='389003' date='Jan 22 2009, 08:41 PM']The audience reaction rewards this mediocrity; the more sophisticated the music, the more the punters struggle. Not their fault but its a fact.[/quote]

Can't say I agree with this equation as it depends on the venue and the audience. If you're in a pub band (where your job is to get people in the pub and get them to stay there and buy drinks), playing something with complicated rhythmic and harmonic structures wouldn't go down too well. However, if you're in a jazz club the expectant audience probably wouldn't appreciate another rendition of "Sweet Home Alabama".


But back to the OP....

I learnt violin at school and did Grade 5 theory. Theory has been a great help when I've been writing or having to create basslines as I know what the chords are. O only on the very odd occasion have I had to read music, the majority of the time has been from chord diagrams. I still look out the lines and blobs every now and again so I don't lose the ability to read music.

I've taught theory to quite a few people though. When they've found out that it's not the difficult, dark art they thought it was, they've found that it has helped their bass playing as they understand the key and the chords of the song.

To be honest, I enjoy music theory and understanding how chords and harmony fit together.

Edited January 22, 2009 by 7string

[birdy]

Could anyone point me in the direction of one of the charts that Bilbo mentions below? I have seen some examples I think but am not sure exactly what should be in them for a song.

It would be useful for me to have some notes (a chart?) of cover songs that I learn so that I could play them from the notes rather than memory as necessary as opposed to the sheet music but would this be easy for me to do?

I think the more theory and general skills that you know the better, can't see how it can harm you at all!

Steve

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='389003' date='Jan 22 2009, 08:41 PM']In an effort to earn the 2009 'most popular forum member' Oscar....

Most people don't need reading or theory because most music that is played in most venues by most people is actually very basic/simple/repetetive/undemanding (I know; I have played it throughout my career). People can get by because there is nothing to test them. They can use their ears because there is not that much in the way of real harmonic movement that will test these skills to any real exent. The audience reaction rewards this mediocrity; the more sophisticated the music, the more the punters struggle. Not their fault but its a fact.

The benefits of reading are obvious; it comes in two types, reading and sight reading. Whilst I can do both, my sight reading is undermined by a lack of real opportunities to do so (it is a muscle that is wasting). But being able to read and write charts allows you to cover all sorts of bases that you might struggle with otherwise. You can communicate ideas reallly easily and interpret those of others with less need for repetitious run throughs and without the logistics problems of endless rehearsals. You can learn more quickly. You can play in more situations without having to 'learn' sets. Its a skill that can open doors if you want it to.

Theory is invaluable if you want to move beyond trained monkey status. Doing it is one thing. Knowing what you are doing is another. My theoretical knowledge, despite being better than most, is not what it should be and I am trying hard to address this but, without it, I couldn't play half the gigs I do. I love the sounds of music and want to know what makes things work. Its not just about bass. I want to challange the pianists, saxophone players and guitarists I play with. I want to arrange big bands charts and string quartets; not because they are lucrative but because they are there. Without theory, I would be doing jigsaws without the lid. With theory, I have more potential to create.

But that's just me.

I am always suspicious of people that advocate ignorance. It jut doesn't compute.[/quote]

[6stringbassist]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='389003' date='Jan 22 2009, 08:41 PM']In an effort to earn the 2009 'most popular forum member' Oscar....

Most people don't need reading or theory because most music that is played in most venues by most people is actually very basic/simple/repetetive/undemanding (I know; I have played it throughout my career). People can get by because there is nothing to test them. They can use their ears because there is not that much in the way of real harmonic movement that will test these skills to any real exent. The audience reaction rewards this mediocrity; the more sophisticated the music, the more the punters struggle. Not their fault but its a fact.

The benefits of reading are obvious; it comes in two types, reading and sight reading. Whilst I can do both, my sight reading is undermined by a lack of real opportunities to do so (it is a muscle that is wasting). But being able to read and write charts allows you to cover all sorts of bases that you might struggle with otherwise. You can communicate ideas reallly easily and interpret those of others with less need for repetitious run throughs and without the logistics problems of endless rehearsals. You can learn more quickly. You can play in more situations without having to 'learn' sets. Its a skill that can open doors if you want it to.

Theory is invaluable if you want to move beyond trained monkey status. Doing it is one thing. Knowing what you are doing is another. My theoretical knowledge, despite being better than most, is not what it should be and I am trying hard to address this but, without it, I couldn't play half the gigs I do. I love the sounds of music and want to know what makes things work. Its not just about bass. I want to challange the pianists, saxophone players and guitarists I play with. I want to arrange big bands charts and string quartets; not because they are lucrative but because they are there. Without theory, I would be doing jigsaws without the lid. With theory, I have more potential to create.

But that's just me.

I am always suspicious of people that advocate ignorance. It jut doesn't compute.[/quote]

Well said, I totally agree with everything that you've said there.

[RayFW]

I ignored theory for years and years after leaving school thinking I didn't need it and that if I did learn it would somehow stifle my creativity.
I relied on my ear for a long time and I reached a plateau in my playing and thought that I had found 'my level' upon which I could not improve. However a few months ago I picked up some theory books and made a real effort to learn to read and delve into harmony etc. It's been a difficult and sometimes frustrating experience but my playing has improved more in that time than in any previous amount of time and my passion for music (of all kinds) has increased.

It's been an absolute revelation for me and I would recommend that anyone who feels that their playing has reached a plateau try it.
Hallelujah! Praise the Chord!

[chris_b]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='389003' date='Jan 22 2009, 08:41 PM']....I would be doing jigsaws without the lid....[/quote]
I like doing jigsaws without the lid!

Edited January 23, 2009 by chris_b

[YouMa]

[quote name='rayfw' post='389202' date='Jan 23 2009, 01:01 AM']I ignored theory for years and years after leaving school thinking I didn't need it and that if I did learn it would somehow stifle my creativity.
I relied on my ear for a long time and I reached a plateau in my playing and thought that I had found 'my level' upon which I could not improve. However a few months ago I picked up some theory books and made a real effort to learn to read and delve into harmony etc. It's been a difficult and sometimes frustrating experience but my playing has improved more in that time than in any previous amount of time and my passion for music (of all kinds) has increased.

It's been an absolute revelation for me and I would recommend that anyone who feels that their playing has reached a plateau try it.
Hallelujah! Praise the Chord![/quote]
+10 for the castor bunch avatar "Watch me Now!"

[xgsjx]

Although none are essential if you play in a covers band doing the same stuff over & over, I think both are in their own merits.

If you play covers & want to learn more complex songs & not so good at learning by ear then the ability to read is valuable.

If you play original material then theory shall be your best friend. It is the understanding of what goes on, how chords & scales work, dynamics etc. It helps to pull entire basslines from whatever chord the guitarist is playing.

My sight reading is now rubbish as I never used it past the age of @ 18 as I don't enjoy doing like for like covers but still read music from books & mags for my own pleasure such as training ideas.