MUSIC THEORY BOOKS

Discuss playing styles and techniques, or share your own here.
Message
Author
Guitaruss
Member
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:56 pm
Location: Glasgow, UK

MUSIC THEORY BOOKS

#1 Post by Guitaruss » Fri Feb 29, 2008 3:42 am

Ive got 2 books from the AB guide to music theory by Eric Taylor...in the second book he talks about a lot of interesting stuff, cromatic chords ,fancy Neapolitan 6th chords, passing tones etc all of which are illustrated in examples from classical music. (a small section of Beethoven, Piano Sonata, Op.31 No.2 is used to illustrate the Neapolitan 6th chord in action for example)

This is all great but its written in musical notation which i cant read, so obviously i cant hear any of what hes talking about... :evil:

Why cant somebody do this kind of book with an audio CD or DVD to compliment it ?
i Know i'd buy it !!

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

#2 Post by Big Bad Bill » Fri Feb 29, 2008 6:30 am

Oh, this is your lucky day Guitaruss! I use Taylor's books merely for occasional reference-its aimed at those taking classical grades, really.

If your main instrument is guitar try this book-
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Music-Theory-Gu ... 912&sr=1-1

And for a less guitar specific, but contemporary guide to music theory, this-
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Music-Theory-Pr ... 036&sr=1-8

Both have CDs and are written in a really friendly, lucid manner.........

Guitaruss
Member
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:56 pm
Location: Glasgow, UK

#3 Post by Guitaruss » Fri Feb 29, 2008 7:01 am

Thanks Bill, i'll give them a try.

Guitaruss
Member
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:56 pm
Location: Glasgow, UK

#4 Post by Guitaruss » Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:59 am

I just realised...i have Guitar pro 5.... i guess i could feed the notes into that to hear em....still a pain in the ass tho :?

guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Location: La Condamine, Monaco

#5 Post by guitarmanK1982 » Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:08 am

Don't be lazy - learn to read.

Your playing will be terribly lacking (especially rhythmically) if you can't read - you will only be imitating, rather than understanding.

Guitaruss
Member
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:56 pm
Location: Glasgow, UK

#6 Post by Guitaruss » Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:53 am

guitarmanK1982 wrote:Don't be lazy - learn to read.

Your playing will be terribly lacking (especially rhythmically) if you can't read - you will only be imitating, rather than understanding.
Sorry man but thats utter bollocks.... :roll:

guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Location: La Condamine, Monaco

#7 Post by guitarmanK1982 » Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:21 am

I'd like to hear why you consider this as 'bollocks', as you so succinctly put it.

Reading music consists of two things - reading rhythmn and reading pitch. One can be practised independently of the other. If you can't read the rhythmn, then you are only imitating what you hear. A good way to test this is to play something across the metronome range, from very slow to very fast. Playing 13:8 at 100bpm means nothing if it can't be done at different tempos, as the understanding of how the phrase fits into the beat must be there.

And yes, as musicians, guitarists should be able to read. It is ridiculous to imagine a musician who can't read (yes some jazz musicians don't, but they can, at the very least, read rhythmn very accurately).

So much is lacking if you can't look at a score and harmonically analyse it/hear it at sight.

But please enlighten me if you think i'm mistaken.

Guitaruss
Member
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:56 pm
Location: Glasgow, UK

#8 Post by Guitaruss » Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:45 am

I dont want to be a guitarist in an orchestra believe it or not...

You made the statement that if you cant read music your guitar playing will be terribly lacking, especially rhythmically, and also that you'll somehow be imitating..

I dont think Jeff beck or Jimi Hendrix (neither of whom reads/read music ) would be considered to have much lacking about their playing...

rhythm is something you feel intuitively...if you have to READ it to understand it then 'good luck' :lol:

Your statement might be of relevance to a session player or classical guitarist
but in this forum i suspect they are not.

guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Location: La Condamine, Monaco

#9 Post by guitarmanK1982 » Thu Mar 06, 2008 7:26 am

My comments are relevant to everyone who wants to be a musician.

You think rhythmn is something felt intuitively?!! Stop making excuses for your own inadequacies.

I'm assuming one of two things here:

a) You can read, but not very well, hence you are biased against reading music.

b) You can't read, and think because you can play a few tunes exactly as they sound on a CD that you can 'feel' the music better than others.


But what you don't realise is that if you could read well, you could learn triple the repertoire (all styles) in less than half the time, as you could become familiar with the complete works of, for example, Simon and Garfunkel, in one afternoon. There is so much repertoire that you are limiting yourself greatly by only being able to play what you are familiar with. This seems silly to me.

And your way of arguing is weak - you bring new subjects into arguments as you can't argue one specific point; who mentioned anything about playing in an orchestra?!

RE Beck and Hendrix - it depends on your viewpoint. Yes, they are very good, but it depends on what aspect of their playing you look at. Their technical proficiency is relatively moderate, yet they balance their playing by very high levels of expression. So it depends on which area you choose to look at, and what you are comparing, with regards to musicianship.

And yes i do have to read - most pro musicians do, for a reason. And, i began by transcribing pieces (in case you think i'm not a 'proper' musician in your eyes; try transcribing all of Coltrane's 'Giant Steps' album and see how far you get without writing the rhythmn down...), but only so much can be done 'intuitively'. You'll realise what i mean if you progress to any sort of proficiency on the guitar. And not being able to read isn't what i would call 'proficiency'.

Guitaruss
Member
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:56 pm
Location: Glasgow, UK

#10 Post by Guitaruss » Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:52 pm

I'm not interested in your opinions, you've kind of confirmed what i already thought...you come into this forum it seems with the sole intent of making yourself feel superior to others....time and again your posts contain an astonishing amount of arrogance and yet when challenged you feel the need to make hollow boasts and make ridiculous assumptions that dont even make sense, a classic trait in the insecure....makes music for films ? ? lives in Monaco ??

Dont make me laugh.

Roger
Member
Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Sat May 03, 2003 8:59 pm
Location: Sweden

#11 Post by Roger » Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:11 pm

Although i'm not responding to the original question I feel I have to respond to guitarman's statements.

I can read music, and that very well. But...it doesn't make me a better musician. The only thing that it has helped me with is that I sometimes visualize rhythms in my head like written on paper when I have a hard time understanding them. I used to only play classical guitar and therefore I only read music. I could play almost everything off the bat, but I sucked big time. It was like listening to a Duracell Rabbit. I couldn't tell a I IV V progression from a II V I just because I was only reading. That is a big trap many people who depend on having to read music to be able to perform fall into. When I quit music school I started to only play by ear and I got soo much better. All of a sudden everything started to fall in place. It is after all music we're dealing with here. We are supposed to listen to it, not read the damn thing.

I think if you're going to be a session musician it's important that you can read music very well. If you're going to write your own music and perform it then who cares. If you wanna pat yourself on the shoulder and tell yourself how good you are that you can sing a Stockhausen score in your head, then congrats. But it has no relation to music. Music score is just a tool. It's up to you if you wanna use it or not. But don't tell anyone they can't be great cause they don't know how to or want to use it.

Bjorn and Benny from ABBA who has written tons of music for musicals can neither write or read music. And Mats Oberg who played with Zappa is completely blind and has been so from birth. He kicks some serious ass on piano. I bet he can outperform you any day even though he has no clue about what an eight note looks like.

Let the bashing begin :mrgreen:

Stringbreaker
Member
Member
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:40 pm

Oh, no not this again...

#12 Post by Stringbreaker » Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:17 am

This is just too much like the old SNL routine: "It's a floor wax! No, it's a dessert topping!"

Reading sheet music will not help you if you have no musical ability, but it has been verified for centuries that studying music immensely helps those who DO have musical ability. Of course you can learn music by ear and achieve superior results - or maybe just some of you. I think that real musicians can and will do anything possible to enhance what they already have, and that includes studying sheet music, tablature or anything else that comes to hand.

If you don't want to learn to read sheet music, fine. Maybe you can get by on the strength of listening and practicing. Or maybe you can start to pick it up with the combination of TAB and Sheet Music used by the Guitar Mags. Maybe even setting up an altar to Jimi Hendrix and annointing your strat with holy water will do the trick...

Not to be too facetious, but what works for me may not work for anyone else. I prefer the sheet music approach because centuries of music to refer to is just too big a lure to ignore. But then I have indeed met musically illiterate players who can do it all - but you will find that they have been listening to and playing music relentlessly for YEARS.

Nothing substitutes for playing and studying. What form you use is up to you. I've stated what works for me, go find your own solution. And for heaven's sake stop insisting that what works for any one of you has GOT to be the only solution for everybody else. There's plenty of room in the sandbox for everyone.

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Location: La Condamine, Monaco

#13 Post by guitarmanK1982 » Fri Mar 21, 2008 8:06 pm

I'm not gonna respond to rudeness, guitaruss. I already gave you a very full answer with regards to secondary dominants, a subject which you previously asked about.

Arrogance would be lack of willingness to share knowledge.

One question is missing from this topic - what defines someone as a 'musician'?

Someone who can play and can't read is usually classed as a 'busker' by the pro music world, unless the player in question is a very special player indeed. Of which there are few. Call us snobs if you wish. But it is about reliability - it is about knowing that if a player is needed, then it is known that they can cope with any situation. This is what the musical world would call a 'musician'. I wouldn't call someone who can play 12:8 at 140bpm accurately, yet can't read 'yankee doodle' a musician. Many players carve a 'niche' with their playing, which is great (Mats Oberg, for example - thanks 'Roger') - but many still wouldn't class them/him as a 'musician', as carving a niche can also be seen as digging a hole for yourself.

But if you really did want to make a living out of guitar, then learn to read, as you would get laughed out of any studio if you couldn't.

And i'm assuming in a Vai forum, you are serious about your playing.

It always seems a shame that this kind of focus isn't applied to reading.

The number of Vai wannabes out there is huge, yet the number of Vai wannabes who can accurately read a score is very small indeed. You do the math.

And Roger, do your research: ABBA have 'created' lots of music for musicals, but they have never actually 'written' any of them - someone else does that for them. One of the benefits of the modern recording world is that it can take what would be classed as mediocre aural tradition (e.g learning by imitating) and make it something else by combining one person's talents with another to produce something far greater than the individual could produce e.g. the talent of a music editor/transcriber with that of an illiterate, yet talented player. The combined result could be classed as 'musicianship'.

And no pro depends on reading. Most pros can clean the floor tiles when it comes to improvisation, as much as they can read - they have all the necessary tools. Carl Verheyen, for one.

fixxer746
Member
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 9:17 pm
Contact:

#14 Post by fixxer746 » Fri Mar 21, 2008 9:07 pm

Ike Willis is an example of someone who has no music training, he can't even read music notation. Yet can play some of the most complex music there is. He played all the odd-time signatures in Zappa's songs just by 'feel'.

I think it is ignorant to say that you must learn to sight read in order to be a musician. However, I also think its ignorant to say that sight reading won't help at all.

Guitaruss
Member
Member
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:56 pm
Location: Glasgow, UK

#15 Post by Guitaruss » Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:44 am

fixxer746 wrote:Ike Willis is an example of someone who has no music training, he can't even read music notation. Yet can play some of the most complex music there is. He played all the odd-time signatures in Zappa's songs just by 'feel'.

I think it is ignorant to say that you must learn to sight read in order to be a musician. However, I also think its ignorant to say that sight reading won't help at all.
I just want to point out that i never said sight reading wont help with your guitar playing....rather that you dont have to be able to read music to be a great guitarist..

Post Reply