i am so annoyed with how much theory there is

Discuss playing styles and techniques, or share your own here.
Message
Author
User avatar
leigh01
Member
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:18 am
Location: England, East Anglia.
Contact:

#16 Post by leigh01 » Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:13 pm

lydian2000 wrote:
burnt out wrote:
leigh01 wrote: is that all you have to say
Obviously that was all I had to say otherwise I would have said more.
Obviously. :lol:
OK, just wondered. :lol:

User avatar
Ricardo
Member
Member
Posts: 606
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:48 am

#17 Post by Ricardo » Sat Dec 30, 2006 1:55 pm

Any idiot could, just most choose not to. I've noticed that like 90% of what makes or breaks a musician is their commitment to the instrument.
I have seen some folks very dedicated, practicing forever, but still not getting too far. I personally have noticed that 100% of what makes or breaks a musician is their sense of rhythm. Understanding of "theory" has nothing to do with it at all, just an other tool to be used or not by a good musician who has rhythm. To me "talent" goes right along with how quick people can pick up rhythmic things. People with less talent, are slower at getting rhythms down, and need to work harder.

Ricardo

*theanimal*05
Member
Member
Posts: 287
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:18 pm
Location: sydney australia

#18 Post by *theanimal*05 » Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:58 pm

joelcornell wrote:
*theanimal*05 wrote:If music was easy, then any idiot could do it.
Any idiot could, just most choose not to. I've noticed that like 90% of what makes or breaks a musician is their commitment to the instrument. Talent is what separates the committed usually, but those that don't want to spend time playing even if they have talent aren't going to be able to compete with someone who practices consistently without as much talent.

But I see what you're saying, I just wanted to make that point.
no sure your right there.
i meant to add to that you if music was easy, any one could do it well and be perfect

User avatar
leigh01
Member
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:18 am
Location: England, East Anglia.
Contact:

#19 Post by leigh01 » Mon Jan 01, 2007 5:19 am

*theanimal*05 wrote:
joelcornell wrote:
*theanimal*05 wrote:If music was easy, then any idiot could do it.
Any idiot could, just most choose not to. I've noticed that like 90% of what makes or breaks a musician is their commitment to the instrument. Talent is what separates the committed usually, but those that don't want to spend time playing even if they have talent aren't going to be able to compete with someone who practices consistently without as much talent.

But I see what you're saying, I just wanted to make that point.
no sure your right there.
i meant to add to that you if music was easy, any one could do it well and be perfect
Yep bang on it's not easy it depends on your brain logic, it may take thirty odd years for someone with low logic in that sort of path where as for someone else that is terrible at everything else it may take a few months, it's just depends what your brain is used to doing like anything.

eareshel
Member
Member
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:29 pm

#20 Post by eareshel » Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:33 am

Well.. We all know that theory kinda sucks learning.
But once you learn it (Trying to atm) It greatly helps you ;)
I know all the stuff about time signatures, tempo, some notes etc.
But ach.. I have so much more to learn... :P

User avatar
burnt out
Member
Member
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:58 pm
Location: usa

#21 Post by burnt out » Mon Jan 01, 2007 1:39 pm

Ricardo wrote:
Any idiot could, just most choose not to. I've noticed that like 90% of what makes or breaks a musician is their commitment to the instrument.
I have seen some folks very dedicated, practicing forever, but still not getting too far. I personally have noticed that 100% of what makes or breaks a musician is their sense of rhythm. Understanding of "theory" has nothing to do with it at all, just an other tool to be used or not by a good musician who has rhythm. To me "talent" goes right along with how quick people can pick up rhythmic things. People with less talent, are slower at getting rhythms down, and need to work harder.

Ricardo
I'd have to agree.Theory is helpful though so I don't think it has zero to do with it.But if there's one thing that people should be the most focused on it's rhythm.Right from the beginning you should be putting a high priority on it.If there ever was any kind of a shortcut,that's it.Not because there are any real shortcuts,but because you could be placing your priorities in the right order and be focused on the most important and universal aspect of music right from the start.That has to get you where you want to go faster.So although it takes alot of hard work and dedication,it's probably the closest thing you are going to find to any sort of actual shortcut.Rhythm permeates all aspects of music so the sooner you grasp that the sooner you will unlock the secret to creating music.And that is the goal,not how much faster you can play than joe the meth head down the street.

Paitent Monkey
Member
Member
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 4:26 pm
Location: Orlando/ NYC

re: Theory

#22 Post by Paitent Monkey » Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:07 am

Theory you have to see as a "THIRD EYE BLIND" situation, best thing to do if one differ from another is "pick" the one that is easier to relate to/ not easier for you either, see what i mean! its Psycho-babel101!!!, Oh,- later on go to the other and finish that one as well. (smaRt!)- !!
paitent monkey. :roll:

spanishphrygian
Member
Member
Posts: 428
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:45 am

#23 Post by spanishphrygian » Wed Jan 10, 2007 4:10 pm

[quote="*theanimal*05"]If music was easy, then any idiot could do it.[/quote]

I don't want to pop your bubble but, there are some idiots doing it. haha

Music theory is a lot easier then Calculus, or Engineering. That is just a cold hard fact really.

User avatar
Ricardo
Member
Member
Posts: 606
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:48 am

#24 Post by Ricardo » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:57 pm

Music theory is a lot easier then Calculus, or Engineering. That is just a cold hard fact really.
I know a few pro phyisicists that are into the guitar that can't grasp some basics of music theory. Hate to burst your bubble.

Ricardo

User avatar
Big Bad Bill
Member
Member
Posts: 4071
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 12:40 am
Location: Honley UK

#25 Post by Big Bad Bill » Thu Jan 11, 2007 3:02 am

Ricardo wrote:I know a few pro phyisicists that are into the guitar that can't grasp some basics of music theory. Hate to burst your bubble.
I know why too. Music theory is generally explained very badly indeed. There is too much usage of jargon without explanation-which I think is often intentional as it boosts egos spouting complex sounding words and phrases (I should know!). Also, I've yet to find a progressive lay person's manual/course that takes you through all the individual steps to getting a good grasp of the over all picture.

Point in hand: my guitar tutor (Ainsley Stones) is fantastic at cutting the bullshit and explaining things in a magnificently simple, lucid way. He explained/demonstrated the modes so easily that it left me reeling and slightly angry at all the magazines, books, DVDs that had made it such a complex idea. He even has the tongue-in-cheek 'Ainsley Stone Patented Mode Conversion System' which I'm try to get him to market! He had me improvising 'modally' after just one half hour session.

Music theory is, indeed, quite simple and I blame its perceived complexity on theoreticians with poor teaching/explanatory skills or no actual desire to get concepts across and an inability to show the fundamental link between theory and practice!

User avatar
ClarkyNZ
Member
Member
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:48 am
Location: New Zealand

#26 Post by ClarkyNZ » Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:10 pm

Music = Life.

Both are more rewarding the more you put into it, and the longer you stick at it. :wink:

spanishphrygian
Member
Member
Posts: 428
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:45 am

#27 Post by spanishphrygian » Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:00 pm

Yeah, I really agree with Big Bad Bill on the whole thing. When someone finally lets you know theory instead of trying to torture you, we find out that it was not such a big deal anyway.

I am not trying to say that people that struggle with theory are less then me or anything like that. I am simply stating that Music theory is not as advanced as other things like advanced math and such.

I mean you hear people talk about how Musicians are so great at math or something. Well, I think that a Circus Pop-corn and Soda (vender) seller is using more math. If there is math in music I figure it is just simple addition or fractions.

Ego is one thing that I really trip out on though. People, even I had in the past had my ego so wrapped up around music and puffing my self up over what I could do, or gloating about what I know. In the end, it is not logically worth all of the compitition for most of us statistically speaking, so wrapping up an Ego around the whole thing is really foolish. Not that I've always been above that.

Really, it all boils down to what you enjoy.

I think that Ego will and can get in the way of theories accessability as well. Just as Big Bad Bill pointed out. We have to have logical teachers and students simultaneously for the whole thing to be easy.

When I went to college, there were a lot of people trying to make music as hard as posible, on other students, on their own students, on their teachers, and so on and so forth.

I think it was because of compitition, and Egos. From all parties.

Just Relax man, and you WILL get it in time. I mean I figure if you can type you WIll get it.

User avatar
Ricardo
Member
Member
Posts: 606
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:48 am

#28 Post by Ricardo » Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:13 pm

I am simply stating that Music theory is not as advanced as other things like advanced math and such.
It really depends on your personal focus. Who are there more of, good competant scientists, or good competant musicians? And believe me there are "egos" in the world of math and science too, even though to laymen it might seem like black and white. I have a musician friend who was the Calculus wizz, it was super easy for him, straight A's, plug and chug, no mistakes. But I could harmonize a melody or figure out a scale or key much quicker than him. My math skills suck. They are not related, and not one is "harder" than the other necessarilly. It depends on your personal focus. Music is easy to some, creative writing to others, math and science to others. Here is the difference though. If you want to be a scientist, you must understand math to some degree. But for music, you could be completely ignorant of music theory and be the master. But the thing is, the guys who know theory in practice, understand that there is a way to apply it, and the application is ultimately intuitive. Meaning, the guys who don't know theory but play well, actually DO know theory, they just don't have abstract names for things.

The moment you realize how theory works is when you can harmonize or "find" the right sound without ANY exploration with your ear first. You just "know" it will sound good before you experiment. That is knowing the intellectual theory behind music. It is surprising how some very accomplished musicians (who did not study music in school or know theory) will be impressed by that. It really is not a big deal to those that know it. But to those that don't, it is a big "mystery" and very impressive, expecially if the guy who knows his theory, plays well too.

Keep in mind, there are plenty of theoretical physicists who plop their "ideas" on mathameticians to work out, simply because they don't know math as well. In music, you will have some great "composers" looking for orchestators for their "ideas". It is very similar.

Ricardo

j3
Member
Member
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:43 am

#29 Post by j3 » Fri Jan 12, 2007 12:02 am

Ricardo wrote:
Music theory is a lot easier then Calculus, or Engineering. That is just a cold hard fact really.
I know a few pro phyisicists that are into the guitar that can't grasp some basics of music theory. Hate to burst your bubble.

Ricardo
I have to agree with bad bill. If a physicist can't understand basic elements of theory, it's being explained wrong. I believe, without exceptions, even a non-musician who can make sense of geometry or algebra can easily understand theory up to the Romantic era without much difficulty. What people hold up as difficult in the realm of fusion is really the random (ie not theoretically divisive) or quite basic. It all boils down to fractions. The harmonic series is actually a component of basic physics theory, so that portion of theory is assumed in the training of a physicist. Nearly all of harmony can be boiled down to triads and altered 7th chords, scales just a function of the former. Modulation can be difficult, but it's largely subjective so even that isn't so difficult as it is subjective.
The elements of application are entirely different than the concept of understanding the theories of composition. While nearly all musicians would find moderately developed application skills much more valuable than advanced theory skills with mediocre application skills, I think the inquiry was about the difficulty of learning the math of music. So, while the utility of understanding theory from an academic perspective can definitely be questioned, I think the math of music is quite easy for the average person when explained effectively.

User avatar
Big Bad Bill
Member
Member
Posts: 4071
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 12:40 am
Location: Honley UK

#30 Post by Big Bad Bill » Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:41 am

What a great thread and some eloquent observations!

Here's another point. I understand theory-I really have a good handle upon it because it's not that difficult and I had lucid instruction. But I can't apply this theory 'on the hoof'. I have sit back and work it out-with pen and paper if possible- by which time the (musical) moment has passed! So maybe it's two skills rather than just understanding. It's understanding and the ability to apply it quickly. I'm assuming the latter will come with practice............?

I think scientists are the most creative people in the world. Far more than visual or aural artists because their work isn't limited to paint to notes. My cosmologist pal tells me about his PhD under Stephen Hawking and doing maths in 106 dimensions rather than our usual four! Now that's difficult!

Post Reply