Music theory.

[TKenrick]

[quote name='shiekaa' post='899281' date='Jul 19 2010, 07:08 PM']At the end of the day, you don't NEED music theory, you will know what sounds good by ear and intuition if you practice enough.

I don't think people should knock TAB so much, it gets alot of people starting out to play bass who will one day become great bass players, not everyone can afford a tutor.[/quote]


I completely agree that you don't [i]need[/i] theory to play bass (or any instrument, for that matter). There are plenty of fantastic bass players who haven't studied theory and play brilliant lines - at the end of the day it has to be about what sounds good. I wouldn't be able to survive as a working bass player/teacher without an understanding of how music works, but I understand that many people for whom music isn't a full time job don't need to learn theory in order to play.

On the subject of TAB, I used it exclusively when learning to play, so I totally understand the perceived benefits of the system. It provides a quick-fix solution to learning music and in some situations is useful for showing specific fingerings. I didn't learn to read until I got to music college, and after an initial struggle I found that it made much more sense than TAB. I find that being able to read dots opens up a whole lot of musical possibilities, and allows me to access and digest new music quickly.

As with theory I understand that you don't need to read to be a great player, but in my experience I find that TAB tends to restrict peoples' musical understanding. Again, I wouldn't be able to do the work I do without reading as TAB doesn't exist in the 'real' world (at least, I've never done a gig/show/rehearsal where it's appeared).

I understand that people can't always afford lessons, but thankfully the internet provides a wealth of free resources for people who want to learn about music - there are plenty of sites that explain musical notation at no cost. I host a blog of bass transcriptions that I use for teaching (the link is in my sig) as I found that there was a distinct lack of notated rock/pop reading material elsewhere on the net.

All of this is just opinion, so feel free to disregard it entirely.

Tom

[GonzoBass]

Re: This-

[quote name='XB26354' post='899408' date='Jul 19 2010, 09:55 AM']I tend to equate it to an artist with colours on their palette. Some very fine artists can produce stunning works with just red, blue and green.[/quote]

Here's an old article of mine,
which has been posted at various places around the web,
but it relates here again in a 'colorful' way.

[quote]I had a student ask me the other day if music theory was really necessary to him as bass player.
His point being that there are many of his "bass heroes" out there who can't read music, don't fully understand the modes and really don't even have a clear grasp of major/minor other than the fact that some notes sound better than others at times, (and some should be avoided altogether!) and yet these players are still on the covers of magazines, making CDs, and playing on MTV.

To this end, all my student wanted to know was technique, technique, technique! He didn't want to hear all that boring theory about the relative major/minor - just show him how to do the four finger tapping riff! And forget about the modes, how do you do the double thump?!!!

I found myself searching for a way to explain to him why he should "eat his vegetables" and not just his "cake" without using the old parental sounding cliches of "... because they're good for you" or even worse, "... because I said so!" Finally, I came up with an age old adage:

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach him to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."

In other words, I could just show you the tapping riff you so desire, young Jedi, and you could use it to impress your friends, fans and possibly even a talent scout or A&R man (the first time they saw it), or I could explain to you what notes make up this riff, the scale or mode it is based on and how to apply this knowledge to other keys or even a progression and you could in turn adapt and expand upon this idea to suit your own playing style and use this technique to express yourself in many new, different and very musical ways, not just use it for what is called "technique for technique's sake" because all you learned was that one riff, in that one key or position.

But I could see by the look on his face he hadn't heard anything past the "use it to impress your friends and fans" part.

I have found my knowledge of musical theory to be a bit like a box of Crayons.
(Follow me here...)

You may not use every color you have on every drawing, and in fact to most, that might be considered "overplaying" or in this case, "scribbling on someone else's drawing." In fact, sometimes you could even get by with just using only the black and white crayons to convey your ideas (major/minor?), but when you are able to bring out just the right color for a song, (say, Dorian Mode for a funky feel?) and bring out yet another color for the next song, (maybe Mixolydian for a Blues?) and then convincingly use yet another color for the next (coaxing a Spanish feel from the Phrygian Mode or throwing down some Diminished riffs for a Fusion feel) I think it makes your palette all the more interesting and in turn just may help you to express yourself better and help you to reach your musical goals.

In the same instance, extent of music theory (again, like boxes of Crayons) come in many different sizes.
The basic box will consist of maybe 8 colors, but through synthetic scales (secondary colors?),
harmonization and chords (tertiary colors?) you will find the palette of colorful possibilities to be nearly endless!
Remember the 64 box?!!!

Learning music theory is a great way of both improving your music vocabulary and expanding your appreciation of music in general. The bottom line to me is: why limit yourself?

Need a starting place?
By just adding the Flat Five to your minor pentatonic scale, you will find you are in possession of a very cool shade of blue!

I hope this helps you as much as it did my students and me.[/quote]

[Doddy]

Exactly.
Knowing what you are doing gives you more options than those that don't. I've never heard anyone complain
because know how to do something.

[MacDaddy]

[quote name='MacDaddy' post='898306' date='Jul 18 2010, 07:21 PM']What music theory can do is give you an understanding of it all.[/quote]

Too subtle?

I’m actually an advocate of people learning to read and having knowledge of music theory. The BTW in the OP was not a recommendation, but to avoid criticism of people who choose not to learn.

Interesting how some people made the leap from not been bound by rules in musical theory, to not needing to practice and that all musical knowledge is worthless. Still, it did allow for those posts to be made with disparagement.

[MacDaddy]

[quote name='EssentialTension' post='898334' date='Jul 18 2010, 07:55 PM']Or am I getting it wrong and I need to learn more theory?[/quote]
Well that wouldn’t hurt any of us would it?

[quote name='TKenrick' post='898859' date='Jul 19 2010, 12:57 PM']or spend my next gig playing b9s on every major chord.[/quote]
if you wanted to what rule would you be breaking?

[quote name='Dave Vader' post='899253' date='Jul 19 2010, 06:46 PM']While Jazz and Prog on the other hand (where they learned the rules first) are more often than not a little more interesting on the rule-breaking front.[/quote]
what rules were they breaking?

[quote name='Doddy' post='899264' date='Jul 19 2010, 06:55 PM']Funnily enough most 'untrained' players who think that they are breaking rules, really aren't.(See the punk comment above)[/quote]
Trained or untrained this is what I’m saying, but although people are posting about rules been broken no-one has said what any of them are.

[XB26354]

Huh? You posed the question of "rules" in the first place, so why not answer your own questions?
There [i]are[/i] no "rules". Theory is a way to document and order sounds that occurred first in nature (eg overtone series) and later through instruments (vibrating string or column of air). The history of music is a gradual acceptance of more and more dissonance. As I see it, "rules" refers to harmony or melody rules laid down in (classical) harmony books, like not using consecutive perfect 5th or octaves. In this case even "classical" composers have broken these rules. So, what is the point of the topic?

[MacDaddy]

[quote name='XB26354' post='901530' date='Jul 22 2010, 01:12 AM']Huh? You posed the question of "rules" in the first place, so why not answer your own questions?[/quote]
Because I don't know the answer. What rules are been broken?

[quote name='XB26354' post='901530' date='Jul 22 2010, 01:12 AM']There [i]are[/i] no "rules". Theory is a way to document and order sounds that occurred first in nature (eg overtone series) and later through instruments (vibrating string or column of air). The history of music is a gradual acceptance of more and more dissonance. As I see it, "rules" refers to harmony or melody rules laid down in (classical) harmony books, like not using consecutive perfect 5th or octaves. In this case even "classical" composers have broken these rules.[/quote]
You are agreeing with the OP.

[quote name='XB26354' post='901530' date='Jul 22 2010, 01:12 AM']So, what is the point of the topic?[/quote]
Well one point could be that no-one has managed to say what rules are been broken?

[XB26354]

I think your original post confused [i]rules[/i] with [i]music theory[/i]. I also think you are confused between the conventions that are used to describe music and the freedom we have to make such music.

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='XB26354' post='901739' date='Jul 22 2010, 11:20 AM']I think your original post confused [i]rules[/i] with [i]music theory[/i]. I also think you are confused between the conventions that are used to describe music and the freedom we have to make such music.[/quote]
I think there is some confusion here about the meaning of 'rules'. Not all 'rules' have the same kind of status, so:

[u]An example of a ‘rule’ that cannot be broken:[/u]
When the notes C-E-G (or any three notes of the same relationship) are played together it is, as a ‘rule’, called a major triad. Can this ‘rule’ be broken? No. Let’s say you played C-Eb-G instead, then you haven’t broken the ‘rule’, you have merely not played a major triad. You have played what, as a ‘rule’, we call a minor triad. No ‘rule’ is broken. Imagine you decided to rename the major triad as ‘happy triad’ and the minor triad as ‘sad triad’. Is then a ‘rule’ broken? Well, perhaps, but it is only the naming ‘rule’ that is broken, the underlying ‘rule’ about the musical relationship of the notes is not broken. These kinds of ‘rules’ are descriptive ‘rules’. You can play whatever you like, but a major triad remains a major triad, and there is a clear and standard ‘rule’ that we call it so. This is a convention we use to describe music.

[u]An example of a ‘rule’ that can be broken:[/u]
As a ‘rule’, concert pitch is A=440Hz. You can break this ‘rule’ by tuning your instrument to A=435Hz. If all your musical colleagues do the same, then you will have broken the ‘rule’ by setting up a new ‘rule’ (i.e. A=435Hz) – so the ‘rule’ is broken in a sense but only by the setting up of a replacement ‘rule’. However, if I tune to A=435Hz while my colleagues remain fixed to the ‘rule’ of A=440Hz then I am most definitely breaking the ‘rule’ and my music will likely suffer for it. Nonetheless I am free to break this ‘rule’ if I care to do so. This is a freedom we have to make music.

[Doddy]

I think the problem here is making a distinction between academia and art.

There are 'rules' in music. Chord and scale structures are made up of 'rules' that can't be changed.
If you play a C chord the notes will always be the same,if you change a note you change the chord.It's the same
with scales. There are also 'rules' about how diatonic harmony works. This is all academic,but they are rules non the
less.
However,in art there are no rules. There are many tunes that move away from diatonic harmonic structures(the Blues is
an obvious example),and there are hundreds of example of players playing 'out' over the changes, ie. they are playing
notes that are not related harmonically to the key. These are examples of breaking the 'rules' in order to create art.

[Bilbo]

The rules are teh explanation and generally come after the fact. They, in turn, allow you to recreate the effect on the original piece that gave you inspiration. If you inspiration comes from somewhere outside of the Western harmonic tradition, there will not be a rule for it in that tradition and you will have to find a different way to make sense of it all. Other cultures have their own rules (ragas, flamenco, african etc) and, if you want to sound authentically Indian, Spanish or African, you willl need to understand the 'rules' of that game. If you don't, you will sound like one of those 'James Galway plays The Beatles' albums. Close but no cigar.

I like the theory because I want to do this properly not play at it.

[GonzoBass]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='902187' date='Jul 22 2010, 07:32 AM']Western[/quote]
Been waiting for this term to pop up.

Thanks Bilbo.

Edited July 25, 2010 by GonzoBass

[thepurpleblob]

I'll tell you what I think. People who pedal all this "I don't need music theory" or "music theory will just tie me down, man" are kidding themselves. Just because you can't be bothered to learn it doesn't mean it's not there. I can't understand why you would NOT want to know what rules and conventions underpin what you do! It's *interesting* for goodness sake!!

[Beneath It All]

[quote name='GonzoBass' date='Jul 19 2010, 09:59 PM' post='899479']
Re: This-




''By just adding the Flat Five to your minor pentatonic scale, you will find you are in possession of a very cool shade of blue!''......I think that would be the blues scale [with the raised fourth].

Edited July 27, 2010 by Beneath It All

[ironside1966]

A lot of the players who don’t know the rules stay safely within the rules but without knowing and when most of think we are breaking the rules there is a rule for that.
Hope that makes sense

[Dave Vader]

[quote name='ironside1966' post='907501' date='Jul 27 2010, 07:46 PM']A lot of the players who don’t know the rules stay safely within the rules but without knowing and when most of think we are breaking the rules there is a rule for that.
Hope that makes sense[/quote]

Yep, sums it up nicely.

[Annoying Twit]

What is this "four finger tapping riff"?

[Bilbo]

[quote name='Annoying Twit' post='908048' date='Jul 28 2010, 11:59 AM']What is this "four finger tapping riff"?[/quote]

It's Gonzobass's metaphor for 'some superficial party trick'. i.e students wanting to know a lick or trick that is of no intrinsic musical value but which [i]looks[/i] clever instead of learning something that is useful like a scale, arpeggio or chord.

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='908068' date='Jul 28 2010, 12:11 PM']It's Gonzobass's metaphor for 'some superficial party trick'. i.e students wanting to know a lick or trick that is of no intrinsic musical value but which [i]looks[/i] clever instead of learning something that is useful like a scale, arpeggio or chord.[/quote]

Ah, thanks. On reading it, I did actually think it was a real riff and I was hoping for tab

[Low End Bee]

So where's a good, non boring, place for a non reading, no theory, never had a lesson, self taught chap to start?
I'm sure I must know some rules as I know when a note sounds 'wrong'.
I'm interested to see what a bit of knowledge could do to my playing even at my advanced age.

[Annoying Twit]

[quote name='Low End Bee' post='908080' date='Jul 28 2010, 12:22 PM']So where's a good, non boring, place for a non reading, no theory, never had a lesson, self taught chap to start?
I'm sure I must know some rules as I know when a note sounds 'wrong'.
I'm interested to see what a bit of knowledge could do to my playing even at my advanced age.[/quote]

I wouldn't advise on the bass playing part. But, I certainly find "Bass Guitar for Dummies" covers a lot of the standard theory as taught in a lot of musical contexts. In terms of general, non-bass specific, theory for pop music "Writing Music for Hit Songs" by Jai Josefs covers a lot of info that IMHO any musician would find useful.

[Bilbo]

[quote name='Low End Bee' post='908080' date='Jul 28 2010, 12:22 PM']So where's a good, non boring, place for a non reading, no theory, never had a lesson, self taught chap to start?[/quote]

Learn the names of all the notes on the neck.

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='Low End Bee' post='908080' date='Jul 28 2010, 12:22 PM']So where's a good, non boring, place for a non reading, no theory, never had a lesson, self taught chap to start?
I'm sure I must know some rules as I know when a note sounds 'wrong'.
I'm interested to see what a bit of knowledge could do to my playing even at my advanced age.[/quote]

Learn how scales and chords work. Don't go mad - just the basic major/minor stuff and basic chords. Read about the "circle of fifths" (it's good for practice regimes). Don't be put off by Jazzers - they're all mentalists

EDIT:
Always relate what you read to the bass. Try to relate the theory stuff to the sound and location of the notes on the bass - if that makes sense.

Edited July 28, 2010 by thepurpleblob

[Low End Bee]

The notes on the neck is the one thing I do know Bilbo.

I'll look up the circle of fifths Purpleblob. Thanks.

[thepurpleblob]

[quote name='Low End Bee' post='908175' date='Jul 28 2010, 01:37 PM']The notes on the neck is the one thing I do know Bilbo.

I'll look up the circle of fifths Purpleblob. Thanks.[/quote]

I should probably have explained. You often read "practice your scales/arpeggios etc.". The circle of fifths (actually backwards, which is the circle of fourths) gives you a sensible sequence to practice them over with an actual beginning and end.