https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNBiLBQrKrnvwcVRD5fS8aA

 

there is a definite truth in perception to your point of view..

"
The greatest musos never knew any music theory or could even read music

I too hate the term music theory... it's not true.. music theory = music language... it has the same basic principles of a language. there's grammar, there's mehanics, and it is communicable, and translatable across the human experience...

So now that we have established that definition, let us rexamine the statement..

If music theory = music language, then the question becomes

[FONT=Lucida Sans Unicode, arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif]"
The greatest musos never knew any music language or could even read music language...
[/FONT]
So now that we have reframed this statement, it bescome a LOT more suspect.. Yes, the greatest musicians have made music without music theory (but that is a testament to their genius NOT evidence to music language's usefulness)

all music language is is a set of established pitch ratios that resonate within us... (that is the action of perceiving sound)

What gives music language its 'traditional beauty' is not the actual pitches themslves but the ratios at which they are intervals of each other.. That is why certain pitches sound terrible played together... (I'm lookin at you Unison and Minord 2nd!)

And of course all of this will probably not make a lick of sense to you.. But it does to me, because I know music theory.. and therefore I am able to comprehend its FUNCTION...

and therefore, I could theoretically make my OWN music language based upon my OWN ratios... hell , that's what modes are..

And by the way... if the greatest musos are able to make such great music theory knowledge, that would necessitate that YOU be as good and talented to be able to make equivalence in product.. That in intself is much more suspect than anything I have said thus far... but still possible..

Please take no offense -- this is more of my opinion, and yours is equally valid to mine..

But I thought I would try to give a more in-depth reply to this oft-stated thought of music language's role in this art...

 

You're absolutely right. I always compare music theory to spoken language when i have these types of conversations. So it makes more sense to skip the extra step and just call it music language from now on. Which is what i am going to do!

Plus calling it music language skips all music theory arguments.

 

Music theory has saved me countless hours and improved my output. Although I haven't dug too deep beyond chords, intervals, keys and scales, I still find it fascinating intellectually. For the want of a better explanation, it has helped me to visualize the music. and I now see everything in relation to the Tonic and the Dominant.

When composing I always transpose my trusty CME Xkey, so that I am at all times faced with the following musical scenario (for major keys). Basically I have used my limited knowledge of music theory to eliminate complexity. Now I just dance around the 1, 3, and 5 keys, without having to calculate any steps between the notes. Capturing musical ideas has become transparent.



When I first came across Hooktheory I totally got what they were trying to do, as my mind was already working in this way.

 

Last edited: Mar 13, 2016

Keep at it.. the more you learn it, the more things start to fall in place, until you start understanding why the people who invented music theory made things the way they are..

..like why do we divide into 7 tones for a 12-tone chromastic scale.. why do we even need scale.. etc. etc

then once you understand to such a high level, then you can appreciate what jazz artists are doing... then even beyond them.. you can understand where moder musicians push boundaries even more and more..

There will continuosly be ah-ha moments.. till you reach a point in zen.. and then say..

"i no longer write melodies or songs.. "

"i tell stories"

 

Oh my kouros!

 

In the old-old days, the Wright brothers never learnt how to fly by studying theory, 'cause there wasn't any - but weve moved on. Doctors and Surgeons (as just one example) now spend years learning yet there seems a group of pretentious wanna-bees who feel they (who must somehow be a cut above the rest of us mere morals) have a divine exeption from doing the work (in the old days this was called an apprenticeship). As for me, I feel that knowledge and facts are the best foundation for everything.
To all all disenters, who maybe either talentless, lazy or ignorant - you keep just doing what you do and live in denyability. Next time I board a plane on holiday, drive over a bridge or take a medicine - I'll feel a lot better knowing no part of it was done by you!
Jezz! Grow the hell up!

 

Last edited: Mar 13, 2016

Everything went through George Martin, he translated their musical ideas. Hence no record label would sign them before he came along, as they weren't very good.

 

finallly someone who said it

 

Yeah no George Martin and music theory, no Beattles as we know them, sorry ash1, but if you want to compared yourself to these guys you're gonna have to drawn yourself in theory cause their music is dripping from it, and it wasn't worth much (which McCartney agrees with) until they could put Tonic and Dominant togeither.
And by the way I know a lot of good musicians who claims not to rely on music theory because they teached themself, and they ALL without any sort of exception rely on it...The only difference beetween them and me is that I know it when they do, while they think they have musical genius...
Learning isn't a sin, you can actually get a lot from it...The dark ages are over, you can get out of the cave and enjoy the light, it's really nice.

 

Of course not, it's not a life and death debate it's alll good...

 

So why weren't they writing masterpieces before they met George Martin? Anybody can hum a tune, but translating and arranging it into a hit record is another story entirely

 

This here above! This is what producers do!

 

Until they know the music theory. Like the adult contained materials rating.

Do the keyboard or other instruments players have the same level of insistency of not learning the music theory?

 

Arranging/orchestrating is also a big part of it too

On one song George Martin was busy with another artiste and Paul McCartney couldn't wait, so he called in Mike Leander to arrange it (She's Leaving Home). Martin was a bit upset about it, as it seemed McCartney was being a bit vindictive because George had dared to put another task ahead of Paul's own needs.

So it proves that the Beatles needed outside help with all of their songs.

 

Last edited: Mar 13, 2016

Yep. Apparently, this is an issue that is "circular". No ending in sight. Just keeps going 'round and 'round... Similar to the planet Jupiter's Great Red Spot. A never-ending vortex that simply produces and reproduces its own "gasses". Nothing learned from those who already know, and nothing learned from those who refuse to know.

 

Last edited: Mar 13, 2016

How convenient

 

Talking like Francis Fukuyama:
The End of History and the Last Man

Maybe today is the end of Music Theory.

 

"Convenience" with one caveat in mind: “75% of life is spent wasting time. The other 25% isn’t nearly as productive.” The issue seems to be merely feeding upon itself with nothing being ventured nor gained. The thread (ultimately) speaks for itself.

 

Music theory is partly like the Bible. Maybe seems useless to you but when you got haunted, you would know its value.

Btw, what does "being haunted" mean in the music?

 

Last edited by a moderator: Mar 13, 2016