yeah its not right to say that if you dont learn theory that you will be less of a musician. what makes up good music is a lot of different things, and trained or untrained is only a fraction of it.
i think knowing about music theory is important myself, but thats more for me and how i work. and how i do things.. but lots of the best music is made by people who might not know theory but do know how to approach things in a fresh and unique way, and do know what sounds good.
making sure you're in tune...
Music theory is only one method of understanding. There are people who know nothing of traditional music theory but have a good understanding of their instrument which is another method of understanding. But to seek neither mastery of your instrument or an understanding of theory i think would be a mistake. That's a mistake i believe i'm hearing a whole lot of lately and has made for some very boring music.Atheory wrote:yeah its not right to say that if you dont learn theory that you will be less of a musician. what makes up good music is a lot of different things, and trained or untrained is only a fraction of it.
i think knowing about music theory is important myself, but thats more for me and how i work. and how i do things.. but lots of the best music is made by people who might not know theory but do know how to approach things in a fresh and unique way, and do know what sounds good.
maybe its hard to put ourselves back in a place where we truly new nothing of music theory. but being forced to learn the names of every scale, chord, inversion, alteration, progression, what role every instrument is 'supposed to play' harmonically and analyzing a bunch of music you don't really like anyway, isn't exactly inspiring. nor do i really think in those terms when trying to come up with ideas that sound good.Torque wrote:
Music theory is only one method of understanding. There are people who know nothing of traditional music theory but have a good understanding of their instrument which is another method of understanding. But to seek neither mastery of your instrument or an understanding of theory i think would be a mistake. That's a mistake i believe i'm hearing a whole lot of lately and has made for some very boring music.
it can help when trying to play over something or somebody else, or trying to figure out what should come next in a song, but even then, i do most of that by ear.
also, it can be limiting to somebody just starting to learn it, as you are almost scared to go ahead and play certain things because you have been told it is wrong. it can take quite some time to get back to a place where you can put names on the sounds you gravitated towards in the first place.
and then theres the whole argument that this world of music is based on rhythmic and sonic interests more than harmonic and melodic, and to suggest that that approach to arranging sound is unmusical is just wrong, but i'm sure you know that. i don't think lack of theory understanding can really be blamed for boring music, you can have quite simple harmonic content and really interesting rhythmic and sonic qualities, but the problem comes when you don't put time or thought into either
played music made the music rules (or theory if you prefer), not the opposite. the rules we use come from our music history, they make the
music fit with what was played before. i intend it more like a tradition...
it can't be bad to know the "standards" of music if you want to make music yourself. and if you wish to break these rules
for example: other regions of the world (asia, arabic countries) use completely different rules and are happy with them...
you have at least to know them (or to know what you want to break...). it is something like making paintings and studying the history of art, it gives you the opportunity to situate your work in an horizon, or a direction.
in electronic music the instinctive factor is stronger than in other music styles, so this discussion applies maybe differently here.
music fit with what was played before. i intend it more like a tradition...
it can't be bad to know the "standards" of music if you want to make music yourself. and if you wish to break these rules
for example: other regions of the world (asia, arabic countries) use completely different rules and are happy with them...
you have at least to know them (or to know what you want to break...). it is something like making paintings and studying the history of art, it gives you the opportunity to situate your work in an horizon, or a direction.
in electronic music the instinctive factor is stronger than in other music styles, so this discussion applies maybe differently here.
See this is the kind of stuff that i think people get hung up on. Who in the hell is going to tell you what you're playing is wrong? Music theory is incapable of doing that. It's merely a system to organize and name musical notes in ways that can logically be passed on to another human being. There is a name for every chord possible so how in the hell does knowing this hold you back? If you have in your mind a mood you want to convey how does knowing how to get to it in the quickest fashion possible hurt you. It sounds like a MAJOR advantage to me. Knowing how scales and modes interact and knowing how to build chords from scratch is some pretty cool sh!t to study. Why is everybody so afraid of it? I find it extremely interesting. I don't know why everybody thinks it's so nerdy to know this stuff. Sounds like the next logical step to me in understanding music better.nospin wrote: maybe its hard to put ourselves back in a place where we truly new nothing of music theory. but being forced to learn the names of every scale, chord, inversion, alteration, progression, what role every instrument is 'supposed to play' harmonically and analyzing a bunch of music you don't really like anyway, isn't exactly inspiring. nor do i really think in those terms when trying to come up with ideas that sound good.
it can help when trying to play over something or somebody else, or trying to figure out what should come next in a song, but even then, i do most of that by ear.
also, it can be limiting to somebody just starting to learn it, as you are almost scared to go ahead and play certain things because you have been told it is wrong. it can take quite some time to get back to a place where you can put names on the sounds you gravitated towards in the first place.
and then theres the whole argument that this world of music is based on rhythmic and sonic interests more than harmonic and melodic, and to suggest that that approach to arranging sound is unmusical is just wrong, but i'm sure you know that. i don't think lack of theory understanding can really be blamed for boring music, you can have quite simple harmonic content and really interesting rhythmic and sonic qualities, but the problem comes when you don't put time or thought into either
I agree with what you are saying here to an extent, although your previous statements about making 'un-musical music' with no theory just isn't true. You can make good music regardless of theoretical knowledge.Torque wrote:See this is the kind of stuff that i think people get hung up on. Who in the hell is going to tell you what you're playing is wrong? Music theory is incapable of doing that. It's merely a system to organize and name musical notes in ways that can logically be passed on to another human being. There is a name for every chord possible so how in the hell does knowing this hold you back? If you have in your mind a mood you want to convey how does knowing how to get to it in the quickest fashion possible hurt you. It sounds like a MAJOR advantage to me. Knowing how scales and modes interact and knowing how to build chords from scratch is some pretty cool sht to study. Why is everybody so afraid of it? I find it extremely interesting. I don't know why everybody thinks it's so nerdy to know this stuff. Sounds like the next logical step to me in understanding music better.nospin wrote: maybe its hard to put ourselves back in a place where we truly new nothing of music theory. but being forced to learn the names of every scale, chord, inversion, alteration, progression, what role every instrument is 'supposed to play' harmonically and analyzing a bunch of music you don't really like anyway, isn't exactly inspiring. nor do i really think in those terms when trying to come up with ideas that sound good.
it can help when trying to play over something or somebody else, or trying to figure out what should come next in a song, but even then, i do most of that by ear.
also, it can be limiting to somebody just starting to learn it, as you are almost scared to go ahead and play certain things because you have been told it is wrong. it can take quite some time to get back to a place where you can put names on the sounds you gravitated towards in the first place.
and then theres the whole argument that this world of music is based on rhythmic and sonic interests more than harmonic and melodic, and to suggest that that approach to arranging sound is unmusical is just wrong, but i'm sure you know that. i don't think lack of theory understanding can really be blamed for boring music, you can have quite simple harmonic content and really interesting rhythmic and sonic qualities, but the problem comes when you don't put time or thought into either
Knowing theory in itself isn't going to make any music for you, so just by knowing the name of a specific chord for instance or not knowing it, has no importance to anything except communication with other musicians.
Understanding how music works is a different thing though and can be separated from traditional theory. I think that's a valid difference. Some people are capable of understanding music in the realms of which they work and quite often possess little or no theory. These guys, who are often self-taught, probably can't name half the chords they play, modes they use and scales they are in but it doesn't make their music any less sophisticated.
I don't think you can help but learn at least some theory anyway, you just can't avoid it. Whether somebody actually wants to learn it is a different thing. I guess the issue most people take, is that it's boring and they'd much rather develop music in a practical application than a theoretical capacity. I found theory terribly boring when I studied it, most of what I learned has probably gone out the window by now anyway and serves no purpose.
The things I think are more helpful are being able to play an instrument to a reasonable level. This in itself is contradictory though because you aren't going to learn that without knowing theory anyways, but although debate able for techno, I think being able to play two-handed keyboard is a very useful skill to have. Even if you don't play anything in to the actual track, the initial ideas that come about from harmonising while playing 2 handed are much more varied and expressive because it's compositional, simply knowing theory in itself is useless from that compositional aspect.
It's not straight cut black & white though, theory itself isn't a bad thing that's for sure but it's most definitely over-rated imo.
