Some people seem to need their knowledge of rythms, keys, modes etc formalized into standard western notation, otherwise they struggle. And some people seem to just get along fine by having a deep understanding of it on a purely subconscious level.
What I'm referring to here is quite simple. If you don't know it, you'll be a crap musician. But you don't need to know it on any formal basis. Intuition can be enough.
A problem can arise, however, when you think you have it nailed by intuition, but really you are floundering in the dark, though this is a difficult one to judge for yourself. You have to ask yourself the question, when hearing tunes, do you know instantly what the notes are just by the sound of them and the "feel" of the tune. If you struggle to hear the notes correctly, your intuition is maybe letting you down. If this is the case, you may well benefit from learning a bit of theory.
I would say the intuitive part is the real meat of the subject, but having a standard terminology for talking about it, even if it’s only in your own head, is very helpful.
I think it varies between each person. For me, I started classically and I got a bit of theory and it makes things easier for me. I wonder what it would be like if I didn't start off with it ?_?
Just to add to what I said, I'd say that having some sort of knowledge in music theory would only benefit you. It'd help and make things a bit more clear as well.
Actually, if you’re sticking strictly to unharmonized melody, there’s only a limited amount of standard theory involved. Once you get into harmony, there’s a whole world of concepts and theoretical models that can help you talk and think about what your mind and ears understand.
I’ve tried to study music theory from books, but the only way it’s ever been very fruitful is when I first have a concept in my head (and ears) and the book gives me some words to attach to the concept and maybe some theoretical connections I hadn’t noticed before.
I don't know music theory, though I can read from the dots to a very limited extent, if its in the key I know.
Now last week, someone gave me a sheet to learn a tune from. So I learned the tune to the point where I could play it - and lo and behold I find I don't play it quite as written. I just KNOW that the D in the 15th bar should be a Csharp. If you play D it just doesn't quite sound as good - although it is not completely glaringly badly wrong.
I guess that's a little bit of what you're talking about Michael. Intuitive music theory. I can't begin to tell you what mode the tune is in. Its a B minor of some sort.
I suspect that there will be opportunities for those who seem
to jump on Michael every chance they get these days just for
the sake to do it again, I wonder if they could just imagine that
someone else started this thread and then answer it
earnestly.
Anyway.
Michael, as discussed previously I’m always amused by the
people who get hot and bothered about theory and want to
shoo others away from it – this obviously stems from a fear of it
either that’s it’s too hard (which it’s not, not the amount you
would need for this music anyway) or a fear that it will turn you
into a robot which is nonsense.
Also, theory is just applying names etc to what you already do
(or formalize it as you put it)
What could possible be wrong with that – surely it gives
people a better understanding of what they are doing – and
this is a good thing if it prevents a strummer like myself from
backing a mixoldyian tune as if it was a major tune.
That being said it should be done in tandem with the music,
and not as a mathematical subject where the link between the
theory and application would be lost – that’s just geekiness.
I agree with you that of course intuition is enough, afterall
theory came after the music.
But your thread is pointed at those who think they understand it
on a sub-conscious level but don’t really – and I’d imagine that anyone who thinks they know and don’t will never find out the
truth – this could be related to the ego thread.
No doubt, theory is less crucial for melody players than it is for backers, and no doubt intuition reigns supreme -- an intellectual understanding of how music goes together doesn't really help a person DO it until that person can begin to convert that knowledge into intuitively generated action.
But I also agree that theory would be helpful for the intuitive player, as a check and balance. Music is a little like grammar in that regard -- you can believe that your ear can be trusted, but you can be wrong.
But I can think of two other defenses for learning theory. One is that people have different ways of learning. Some of us approach things in a left-brained manner; others approach them in a right-brained manner. Those among us who are more left-brained tend to want to learn the logic behind stuff first and then perhaps struggle to merge it into intuitive behavior. Others among us gravitate toward learning intuitively and then perhaps struggle to learn the language of the discipline or the logic behind it.
The other reason is just for the pleasure of it. I guess I believe that learning why and how something works provides another way of appreciating it. Think about whiskey and whisky, for example -- I love the stuff just because, but I also enjoy picking up on regional differences, the nuances that make one different from another. Knowledge just makes the enjoyment of it more whole.
It doesn't hurt, and sometimes it helps. Sometimes I wish I got my theory in a class, rather than in bits and pieces along the way. Deliberate study often produces a better foundation than mucking about in a random fashion.
Very quick from Jim Troy, but as Michael is now my hero, I must protest.
Musical theory SHOULD help one a lot, and I know some classical violinists sound stilted on the fiddle, and James Galway never sounds confident with Irish stuff.
To illustrate. I have been "playing" a mandolin for 30 something years. I sat in the house and played slow airs, by working out where to put my fingers. I do not know any of the notes on a mandolin. I also learnt songs like this.
Now if someone wanted to sing "Carrickfergus" I would think "I know that". But then they would sing it in C, and I don't know what key I played it in, I just knew where to put my fingers. How was I supposed to know that you could play the same tune by putting your fingers on different frets? Why do you think I played the bodhran as well?
Anyway a few years ago I learnt a few scales, and it makes things a lot easier. I had to ask JfiddlerH questions such as "If it is in Bb which note is doh?" Having been shown this I cou;ld then work it out, as to me a scale is doh, ray, me. I still don't know any notes on the mandolin, with the exception of GDA and E for obvious reasons. Our guitar player used to have great discussions about this, I think he thought I was winding him up. Sometimes one's reputation can be damaging.
Anyway if someone now sings "Carrickfergus" in A,Bb,C,D,E,F, or Aminor, I should be ok..
So a bit of theory helps, and you cannot get any more basic theory than mine. Drumming theory however, 2/4 4/4 time and all that is still a mystery, which is why I aways advise bodhran players not to read books or listen to cds about "how to play the bodhran". You end up with a rhythm, but an inability to change with the music. And you forget to listen.
To conclude, my darling boy plays guitar, and knows theory. It never ceases to amaze me that he can just lift a mandolin or whistle and play something, even though he does not play these instruments. He obviously knows the notes.
Musical theory is surely one of the most gloriously gut-wrenchingly achingly impenetrably mathematical self-generating artistic wonders of the natural world, representing with mere marks on paper the infinitely variable interplay between physical sound, human emotion and universal spirituality. Who in their right mind could possibly NOT want to know about this??
maxF what you decribed are the dots.
Theory doesn't have to be about the dots, it can have more to do with the music itself, someone showing you something
on the fiddle and then explaining what it was - differences
between Dorian and Minor for example - doesn't have to be gut wrenching,or a maths exam, you can hear it in action.
IMO, music theory is very helpful. It can really add to your playing too. Now, some people do just fine without it because they have excellent ears, but others need to know. I love knowing all the technical stuff and learning more, so while I may not need as much theory as I know, I plain like knowing it.
Ironically, I'm turning in a paper for my college class tomorrow on the basics of music theory. Everyone hope I get an A!
Jim, it goes like this (and the bear Island reel is cracking illustration) ...
If your intuition moves you to play a G sharp in the first bit of The Bear Island, then you don't need to know it's a G sharp. And you don't need to know the chord is an E major.
However, if you struggle, the "knowledge" that it's a G sharp and the "knowledge" of the corresponding E major triad (B nat, G sharp, E nat) is a help.
The important point I'm trying to get across though is that if you have trouble hearing that there is a note in the beginning of that tune tune that is half way between two notes you would normally play, the knowledge that there IS an option between those two notes and that it changes the chord to E maj from E min is helpful. The knowledge that you are playing a "major third" rather than a "minor third" is helpful. The knowledge of what major and minor thirds are is helpful.
Though, If you've been playing the mandolin for "30 something years", and "If it is in Bb which note is doh?" ... I respectfully refer my honerable freind to a discussion I posted not so long ago....
A bit of theory is useful - theory is really a way of breaking music down into terms that let people communicate musical ideas using words. However I agree, when people get carried away with it it usually leads to no good. There's a lot of wiggle room between people who haven't a clue of any of the notes on their instruments & some bombastic free-jazzer for the rest of us to occupy.
I guess theory is useful when you have to explain something that you do (instinctively) to someone else. I love reading about theory but I have almost no ability to retain it for longer than a couple of days because I don't use it regularly enough. I guess if I was teaching I might force myself to retain the info a bit better.
Also theory can be useful to work out why you are having a problem with something musically and the Beare Island Reel might be a good example for most accompanists when they hear the tune first - what the...? I usually play an E chord that has no 3rd in it at the start of that tune. Full on Emajor sounds a little too defined.
I guess what this all amounts to is saying that intuitive learning is better, but when you get stuck, theory can sometimes find you a way around the barrier.
You’re missing the point Larsheen.
MIcho Russell etc may not have bothered about theory
because they knew it instinctively. That’s what this thread is
about I think.
Ah no, it is you I fear who misses the point. (this could go on
forever)
Anyway, my main point is that when people hear the word
theory they imagine “gut-wrenchingly achingly impenetrably
mathematical” and anyone involved in this Withcraft couldn’t
possible be interested in “getting on with trying to play the
tunes.” (you say that as if we’ve no interest in the music)
But I’m not the one who started the thread, and one of the
main points in the opening post is “But you don't need to know
it on any formal basis”
This is the point I think you missed when you said “Micho
Russell, Paddy Canny, Sonny Murray etc never worried about
theory, their lack of knowledge of it”
Surely Michael you are not suggesting that your old buddy cannot play? Our fiddle player went one better. He had never heard of scales, hadn't a clue what they were. Mind you he was only about sixty years old.
And yes, Jim, as a qualified English teacher who has never taught English, I can agree that there should have been a comma.
Spot on Larsheen, I agree wid you, just learn them off the cd or tape or at your session and all the theory in the world won't make you a better player.
Best put in more practice than worrying about it. I leave the theory to the backers, but I've met a few that could blind you wid theory and still make a hash of their playing.
Maybe more people should just concentrate on the practical skills of playing and listen more.
And Bodhran Bliss, catch on to yerself and stop making an eejit of yerself by displaying your monumental ignorance. Maybe the your handle should be Blissfully Unaware. Best keep it that way, the shock would probably be too much for you.
Didn't you guys catch the typo? It was supposed to say "marital arts", which is, of course, much more impressive. How about a keg of Guinness, a pot of tea, a brand new pair of shoes, new house, new car?
What’s your problem BB, trying to mock both my music and my interest in martial arts. With no false modesty I can guarantee that I’d be very welcome at most sessions. Can you say the same?
Intense but relaxed focus, timing, speed, sitting within the moment, still but moving, all can be found in both the music and martial arts but I’m fairly sure you haven’t a clue what I’m talking about.
Unless you’re physically unable why don’t you move up to a real instrument and learn the repertoire instead of thumping the moronic drum.
If you love this music I can’t see why you’d be content with the drum with its obvious extreme limitations. And I don’t want a big debate about the drum, like death and taxes they will always be with us. No doubt this will give you an opportunity to bang your own drum, again.
Yes Jim, you can worship at the court of Queen Sal, all supplicants welcome.
GaryAMartin, you sound as if you'll make someone a good wife. See if you can pick up someone on the session.
Jim I would never do a disgusting thing like spit on anyone. You should seek urgent therapy if you like that sort of thing, although I don't suppose you're hurting anyone with your celestial perversions.
I assume you're talking about M Gill? Michael and me don't suffer fools gladly but other than that I don't think he could survive long in my tender mercies, so your attempts at matchmaking are doomed.
How about GaryAMartin for Michael as he sounds very domesticated though a maybe a wee bit materialistic?
Someone mentioned Micho Russell. I believe this to be true....
At school the teacher was giving out about the music scale and drawn on the blackboard was the staff and eight notes.
MR is asked how many notes are in the scale.
SIX!
Teacher is concerned, asks again, same answer, ...and after repeat of scene, MR is whacked on the back of the knuckles with a ruler, and in exasperation the teacher asks "Why do you keep saying SIX when there EIGHT notes on the blackboard?"
BECAUSE THERE"S ONLY SIX HOLES ON A WHISTLE!
I was lucky enough to play with this lovely man twice, and you don't need theory when you charm music from a whistle or flute like he did!
You're very welcome Larsheen. Your comments about playing the music are intelligent and well informed. You can call me Sally.
Briantheflute, you are the most Godawful name dropper on this site. You strike me as a deeply creepy, touchy-feely type with very bad intentions.
I wouldn't trust you as far as I could throw you, though with my training I could probably throw you further than I could trust you.
Many of us have played with some of the greats but we don't have to constantly tell everyone about it.
I suspect that you are deeply unsavoury as a person but have managed to carve out a career for yourself because you're a good player. This does not excuse you.
Keep your facile, obscure political comments to yourself as I don't see they have much relevance on an Irish music site.
You can call me psychoSal, if indeed I allow you to address me at all.
Again Briantheflute I think the point is missed (are people
doing this deliberately??)
Micho Russell knew this stuff instinctively.
I don't have the natural talent of Micho Russell.
Do you ?
And it's not just the backers that need to know it – for
eg. If you want to add some variation to a tune, are you
1. Going to just give someone else’s variation that you learnt
from a CD, or
2. Do you instinctively know how do to that because you have
the natural talent of Micho Russell or
3. Because you know a bit of theory can you provide it from
within yourself.
I think when people hear the word theory they think of pages and pages of mathematical music - which is not what we're talking about here when referring to theory
All melody players must know enough theory to yell at the accompanist properly when they're cocking everything up, or at the very least, enough to realize that the accompanist is cocking things up and needs a yelling at. As for melody players who aren't even aware the accompanist is ruining everything, maybe they should take up knitting.
psychosal (I'd like to call you Sally, but I'm probably not allowed), I also think Larsheen knows what he's talking about, but I wish he'd pay more attention to BegF before trashing the notions of formal theory being irrelevant to some, and yet help to others.
I play a number of instruments but at a "Tunes" session I would stick to the bodhran because I can greatly enhance the overall effect. And don't worry about name dropping, some of the "greats" slip my name into conversations all the time and it doesn't bother me.
And as for you grovellers on this site, I've a hurling stick, so I don't need to move gracefully.
Michael of course you can call me Sally. I'm not such a dragon as these posts would make out. I can't stand bullsh*t and I call it for what it is.
As for you Bodrhan bliss, you can stick to pshycoSal as you seem to be implying a threat to hit me with a hurling stick. If hitting women with a weapon is your bag, then you've picked the wrong one, but I can't say I'm surprised.
You seem to be under the delusion that what you do enhances the music but you probably couldn't lay down a 4/4 or 9/8 or 2/4 beat, so what good are you other than a plodding and probably too loud noise that prevents the lead players hearing each other.
I strongly suspect that you could never reach session standard on a melody instrument, otherwise why wouldn't you? Where's the joy in banging a drum compared to playing tunes. Those that can do, those that can't stick to the drum.
I suppose I should have let you ramble on unchallenged as you condemn yourself without my help, with your risible and childish comments, but then you are blind to that. There is often an undercurrent of violence in your threads. Do you imagine yourself a dangerous man? You are probably more a danger to the music in a session than you are with your hurling sticks and metal bars.
Finally, your obsessive self-promotion and puffery is probably a sign of a deep (and understandable) inferiority complex. Good players let their music do the talking.
How much do you charge to psychoanalise people are is it free.
To understand the drum, you need to understand Irish music. And yes I could be another whistle player or mandolin player, one of the many, but it is much better being the only bodhran bliss.
And such a lot of presumptions. Too loud on the drum, inferiority complex, good players let their music do the talking. You couldn't presume to tell me which horse wins the 3.30 at Newmarket tomorrow by any chance?
You are right about one thing. I haven't a clue what 4/4 or 9/8 or 2/4 beat is. As the old man once said to John Sheehan of the Dubliners, "Can you read music or are you just talented?" I obviously come into the latter category, but even I couldn't play without music, a bit pointless anyway don't you think.
As for hitting women with hurling sticks, nothing sexist about me.
Sally, (thanks for that) I'm afraid you may do Mr Bodhran Bliss a disservice.
Yes he's an eedjit. And yes he will probably never be a musician (though I juggle cynicism with eternal optimist). The problem with him though, is not his irritating comic arrogance, but his sincerity. He really believes the self promotion he spouts. I'm afraid that he probably does not imagine him self to be a dangerous man (even though he is undoubtedly a danger to the music).
Now they are all at it. A poor wee old man like myself, being attacked. That's these youngsters for you today, you'd be afraid to go out the door.
I knew Michael would come to my defence. EEjit, yes, and we are well aware of your definition of musicians, even rules out Sally as she plays a whistle instead of a flute. I mean.
Just one thing, self promotion?
Put it this way. I go into a session with a drum, people ask are you any good? I say, "Oh no, I just try to play along". Now after two tunes they are sitting saying, "Jaysus he's brilliant".
So I am going to look like one of those self modest condescending prats?
Bodrhan bliss, what a sad delusional little man you are (no matter what your height). You have condemned yourself with your own words and only confirmed everything I wrote about you, but only you cannot see that.
I can't predict the winner of a race but I can build up a picture of you from your own words and sorry reading they make indeed. You are too boring and predictable to cross swords with so I'll leave it at that. Even if you're doing it as a windup it's become very tedious and you should change your tune. Oops, sorry I forgot, you can't even do that.
You with the big long name, I have many friends and contacts and I know of Briantheflute through them, hence the venom of my delivery. Defend him if you must but there's many will be right-onning my verdict.
Michael, I wouldn't waste time waiting for BB to become musical after 30 years of inertia and messianic self-belief.
I don't know what this different theory is, as regards some of the postings. Quite simply if someone has studied music does this not include the theory of music? So some teachers have said to me.
I don't know, I never studied music.
I would add that the point I made about Micho Russell was to further the point made by BegF where he said " knew it instinctively".
I'm a great believer that people don't have to read music, to be able to play it.
Very frequently the study of music does NOT include theory.
It always unsettles me when I meet a fine player (usually a piano player) that can read anything you put in front of them, but have no clue what yr after if you ask for a "D chord".
They usually make some allusion to their 15 years of training and never heard of such nonsense.
As a melody player, if you can read, or play by ear, it doesn't help at all, you don't need it. As an alongsider, it is a big help to determine what chords are needed where ( bearing in mind that it takes a little more doing to identify 2,3, or even 6 simulanteous notes than it does 1), and several other things that strict melodists shouldn't worry their pretty little heads about.
It's useful, it's not necessary . I was asking Antoinette McKenna about how to set up accompaniment and she said she had no Idea, she'd been doing it all her life and didn't remember learning it. I know a couple of champion guitarists that learned everything they ever needed by playing along with the radio.
I agree with you ""people don't have to read music, to be able to play it" I also believe that one shouldn't regard themselves as a complete musician if they can't play by ear...but that's a private opinion ( at least it was) and I don't consider one to be evil or duncical it they can't ...yet.
That's not at all what we're talking about here.
I agree with MG that intuition can be misleading, that's not why I do it. I do it because I frequently get stuck in places where I don't have my "yoke" : I get musical Ideas, I can make a few scribble marks on a piece of paper and if it works, I keep the paper to remember to try it when I get a chance. If it doesn't work, I still have the amusement akin to say... a crossword puzzle.
Briantheflute, I too don't believe you have to read music to
be able to play it, and in this music I think in can do more harm than good, unless you're aware of shortcomings of it.
I don't view reading music as been what we mean by theory
as discussed here.
Jim - this has been niggling at you for a while, do you really think this is a right v wrong thing. It might be better to address it full on rather than throw in digs every now and then.
"I'm a great believer that people don't have to read music, to be able to play it."
Brian, that's not a believing thing, it's a plain fact. We all know excellent musicians who can't read a note & don't need to, to play brilliant music.
One of the finest musicians I know can't read a note & yet he is a brilliant Accordion player & my favourite Guitar man in a session.
Written music is a simply a handy wee tool.
We could all survive, quite happily without ever seeing written music ever again. But I'm sure we would all be very unhappy if we had every tune book ever printed, but couldn't actually play a note!
Music theory, you can take it or leave it, it's not what's really important!
"Look BegF", Larsheen in your impatience with me to agree
with you you have conveniently left out some of the quote.
Michael said in the first post "If you don't know it, you'll be a
crap musician. But you don't need to know it
on any formal basis. Intuition can be enough"
Whereas you're paraphrased as saying "your thought that
without formal theory you are a crap musician."
Can you not see the differnce ?
The best way to learn this music is by ear - few will disagree
with that.
But saying "Formal theory will never ever help you play trad" is
not true.
Never ? You're saying that there is no one out there who didn't
get it instinctively benefited from some theory (and not the
theory of mathimatical music but of practical
explanation ie" look listen to this, this is the difference
between dorian and minor, this sound here listen to it,hear that note ?)
As for the backing V melody :
"And it's not just the backers that need to know it – for
eg. If you want to add some variation to a tune, are you
1. Going to just give someone else’s variation that you learnt
from a CD, or
2. Do you instinctively know how do to that because you have
the natural talent of Micho Russell or
3. Because you know a bit of theory can you provide it from
within yourself."
I dispute that, Larsheen. Of course melody players would benefit from formal theory. One of the main benefits - and it's a big one - would be a deeper understanding of key changes, and why the 'lift' you can get between tunes works some times but not other times, despite ostensibly being the same key change (modal shmodal, eh?).
Although, to the listener and perhaps the formally unschooled player, "key" seems to be a function of harmony and therefore of relevence to the backers only - make no mistake: it's the melody players who dictate key changes, by selecting the next tune.
When you insist on assuming that I'm referring to theory books,
then you're agreeing to differ with a point you think I'm making.
Not the point I'm actually making.
Well to agree to differ you must at least understand what
the opposing view is (I obviosly have failed in explaining my point ).
Don't assume that I don't try to play "from the auld heart"
or that you will leave "variation by theory to yourself and whoever" - that is a bit on the patronising and completely missing the point.
Re:
1. Going to just give someone else’s variation that you learnt
from a CD, or
2. Do you instinctively know how do to that because you have
the natural talent of Micho Russell or
3. Because you know a bit of theory can you provide it from
within yourself."
I don't believe Micko Russell was born with that talent, I believe he learned it over the years, but not from books & theory but just be listening & listening & listening.
If he then, in later life wished to add a variation it wouldn't have come from some inherited mystical anscestral knowledge & it most certainly wouldn't have come from any musical theory, it quite simply would have come from an almost infinite supply of versions & variations of tunes which he had spent a lifetime storing away in his head & could pull out & use as & when needed.
I'm sure that Micko, like myself and countless other trad musicians, wouldn't have known dorian or minor if he'd found either in his Corn Flakes & that, to me, is one of the wonderful things about ITM - we don't ever actually NEED to know any of that theory stuff.
You might not like that fact, but nonetheless it is a fact. We don't need any of it to play - all our lives!
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory? One question though - if you never tried it, how would you know if it helps or not ?
All I'm saying is that we don't need to try it, because quite simply, we know we don't need it.
If others choose to use it & find that it helps them, that's fine & good luck to them, but if I choose not to use it, that doesn't mean that I'm necessarily missing a trick.
I might get to the shops faster if I travelled by Skateboard, but I'll get to the shops quite happily all my life, by just walking & I don't ever need to use a Skateboard.
Just because the board is faster, doesn't make it a better way to travel.
Consider all the things I will miss if I only ever travel by skateboard?
Big isn't always better than small.
Fast isn't always better than slow.
Complicated isn't always better than simple.
I was out playing last night and fully realised that I had underestimated my ability on the bodhran. The fact that there was a lad with a djembe perhaps helped, never seen one of those at a session before, lovely bass sound.
And Michael, sadly you cannot marry Sally. She knows (?) so much about me, that I presume she is already married to me.
More knowledge is almost always better than less. Me, I'm a crap musician. I keep trying to learn it, but it keeps draining out the plughole of my brain anyway. Will keeps trying anyway, brave man that he is.
Hey Larsheen, I see you have re-christened me Ptatmigan! You just forgot the -di on the end! But he is in fact my Indian relative, who sadly doesn't have the luxury of a silent P - Ptatmigandi!
Hey Zina - that's a new name for it, isn't it - "the plughole of my brain"
when I posted this question i was really careful to phrase it so as to try and not to get into the confrontation situation that so many threads end up in.
What I didn't count on, however, was an attitude from someone that was so closed minded that they couldn't help imposing their prejudice onto my question, when it clearly wasn't there. BegF has tried to explain it, but to no avail.
To confuse:
"If you don't know it, you'll be a
crap musician. But you don't need to know it
on any formal basis. Intuition can be enough"
with:
"without formal theory you are a crap musician."
Music theory is little more than a way of systematizing things that you hear and understand to be good ways of making music. In the process of systematizing, you will probably get ideas for additional good ways of making music. The "little more" comes when anyone uses it to prescribe or proscribe, rather than DEscribe, how music is made
Most of what you find in music theory books describes Western art music, jazz and pop music and mostly from the point of view of harmony. Except for backers, this is not hugely useful in Irish trad. But if you happen to have some inclination toward systematizing (am I allowed to use that word three times?), you might find it useful to learn about modes and how they like to be altered in certain ways for subtle effects. Or you might come to realize that a cluster of notes can suggest or imply a chord, even when the tune is unaccompanied.
Once you take that point of view, you have a new way of understanding the organization of a tune. Now, some understanding of harmony (chord progressions) *might* actually help you, depending on what you're trying to do. It can certainly be useful if you're composing tunes and might help you advise your backer. Or, if you're into playing variations within a tune, it might guide you a bit there.
Last week, I was listening to a CD from a well-known player who writes lots of tunes. By the end of the CD, I was thinking about how the tunes often didn't seem to go anywhere. The chord progression might be D D D D D D D D D A D D D D D A D... Not that that couldn't work, but two or three tunes in a row with so little harmonic movement starts to sound monotonous, or maybe mono-chord-ous. Here, I thought, is a person who could benefit from some understanding and appreciation of chord progressions.
I think I've talked myself into a position here. I would say that for backing or for composing tunes, some systematic understanding of how music works is very useful. For playing melodies, maybe useful, maybe not.
Psycho Sal is RIGHT. Obsessive self promotion and puffery probably is a sign of a deep (and understandable) inferiority complex. You know the type of person she means, always running people down and holding dogmatic opinions.
The sort of person who would say things like "I would be welcome at most sessions", "all you other people won't have a clue" and accusing others of "monumental ignorence" or being an "unsavoury" type of person.
You know the type of person she means. The type that knows everything about people, never having met them, and everything about everything, and looks down at the "less gifted".
Yes such a person probably does have an inferiority complex.
I had a formal education in music before I stumbled across ITM. My first attempts on the concertina were riddled with errors on account of my assumptions based on my training. I bent over backwards to follow all the rules of Western music and produced the melodies -- but it lacked the flavor and character that I was hearing. When I first had the good fortune to sit down with Noel Hill in 1986 and compare what he was doing to what I had sorted out I was amazed how many rules he was breaking. From that point on I ignored my musical training in my pursuit of ITM.
I realized that certain aspects of music theory applied to ITM, but it wasn't intended that way from its conception. As I met more and more players both locally and from Ireland I could see that music theory had little relevance to their approach. As for me personally I find it to be a great tool when I'm arranging music for the gigs, but most of the time I pretty much leave it locked in a compartment somewhere in my head.
If I hear something in a tune that's unique and I want to understand it I'll reference my training to figure out and attach a definition to it. My feeling is that music theory is the analysis of what musicians already know. Music theory takes something intangible and gives it definition.
That's a great reply mr button. Interesting, isightful and completely in the spirit of the question No judgmental nonsense about what some people falsely perceive as the other side. I'm glad that some people at least realise that this is not a discussion about sides
Oh yes it is! ...........Oh no it isn't! ................Look out Div, he's behind you!!! .............................................Soon be panto time - yippeeee!
I think applying the term "intuitive music theory" to the concept of refined ear-hand coordination is nonsense. Refining hand-ear coordination isn't intuitive or theoretical. It's practical and experiential. It *requires* disengagement of the analytical mind. The term "theory" refers only to analytical gymnastics - defining things in such a way they can be communicated without any experiential foundation. Like, for example, when I met some fantastic jazz guitarists who said they didn't "get" Irish backing, and I explained it for them in theoretical language, and they went "OH!" in such a way that it was obvious they thought be able to adequately back Irish music from that point on, and yet not a note had been played.
If you consider just playing well to be "music theory", then the term has no meaning at all. It's like saying existence itself is intuitive understanding of Einstein's theory of relativity.
A few months ago I asked someone to teach me a tune and he said "I'll do better than that, I'll write it down for you!" So then there was the hunt for paper and a pen, then the tedious drawing of lines on the paper, then about a half hour of scribbling while we both sat there silently, then another hour of me trying to make sense of the scribbling, and now, months later I still can't play the damn tune. If he'd just played it a few times with me I'd have had it in 20 minutes. In the light of that experience, I can honestly say I prefer experiential over theoretical tune transmission.
But Kerri, isn't that a discussion about learning from ear versus
learning from dots - a completely different thing.
I think we all would prefer "experimental over theoretical tune
transmission".
Jack, I'm interested to know what kind of formal music training you had - was it classical/ jazz /blues/ ITM - as theory must be subsequent to the music (ie blues theory didn't come before
the blues) it can't be general and applies to a certain genre,
so your formal training may not have been relevant in which case you would have been wise to ignore it.
Someone please tell me these people are not Irish.
Irish people could not be that gullible, please God know.
Or has the "South" become that Americanised.
I am not attacking Americans by the way, it must just be a different bent on life, a different slant on humour.
And as someone who alas mostly plays melody, especially on a bodhran because my harmonies are poor, I must say again that a knowledge of music theory must be a boon.
Yes, but you base the ridiculousness of the idea on theory can be communicated without any experiential foundation - that doesn't necessarily have to alway be the case.
As I thought. A sexist (take it like a man) a conservative fascist (dumb bar steward, stupid drunk), no wonder a "div" is a derogatory term in this part of the world.
The insecure Sally may be many things. But Div is a he man.
BegF, to answer your question; I went through a 4-year college course in harmony and music theory and studied keyboards. I covered classical, baroque, renaissance and medieval styles while I was there. After leaving college I became interested in Jazz.
I think music theory comes in handier if you’re playing back-up. Watching Junji’s approach was interesting considering he was a child prodigy and studied music formally as well. Junji would thrive on players that came through town who played in different keys. He once backed up Noel Hill without a glitch as Noel pulled out one concertina after another in various tunings. I’ve also watched him on stage backing up complicated barndances, marches and the like coming at him from people like Conal O’Grada. I remember the night with Conal when Juji came off stage I asked if he had ever heard that tune before. Junji laughed and said, “I never hear that tune before.”
The back-up player I currently work with has a background in Jazz that helps him tackle the modal environment of ITM tonality. He is able to sort out complicated tunes as well and has a lot of different ways to structure his chords around them. He often has a different way to back up the tune on each repetition. He told me he draws on his experience playing jazz, but has also developed his own approach.
You assume you know nothing of musical theory and you twiddle about purely by ear on an instrument. In fact, it doesn't even have to be an instrument, you could be simply humming. You discover two notes that sound remarkably similar. You realize that one is higher than the other (though you don't use the terms higher and lower because that's too technical). You discover that for all intense and purposes, these two notes are interchangeable.
If you are singing, it's hard because there is no reference. But if you are on a piano, you notice that the pattern of the layout of the keys is repeated, and that these notes you have discovered that are interchangeable, fall on the same part of the repeated pattern. If you have a guitar, you notice that these notes are twelve of those straight bits of metal things apart. If you are playing a tin whistle, you notice that the fingering is the same, you just have to blow a bit harder or softer.
Now the whole point of my question is: At this basic level, you don't need to know the word octave, you don't need any knowledge of the concepts of simply doubling and halving frequency. Your intuition will suffice.
But what happens next, is that as we continue to teach ourselves, we pick up terms from other people. Terms like octave. And we keep on picking up terms. Then some peoples' heads say "I have enough terms now, thank you". Others are not so closed. Some people get along fine without the terms, though with others, it helps them play.
Me? I have an enquiring mind. I like to ask "but why is there 12 frets between the octave?". So I divide it up into 13 and guess what, it sounds bloody awful.
Michael, that's exactly what I meant when I said, "My feeling is that music theory is the analysis of what musicians already know. Music theory takes something intangible and gives it definition."
As for your last query about the 13th division: the 12-note scale is based on a natural phenomenon of overtones. If you were to hold down the pedal on a piano so the strings are free to vibrate and you strike the middle C, there are strings that will vibrate in sympathy based on the overtones. Those notes include the octave, fifths and thirds primarily. If you were to then dampen that C note that you struck you would hear these other strings.
In the natural overtone series this sequence isn't exactly the same if you played one of the notes of the overtone series. Strict adherence to the natural phenomenon is called "Justified pitch," but the piano is tuned according to something called "Tempered pitch." The tempering of the scale equalized the inconsistencies of the phenomenon so the notes would be equally out of tune in each key. Western music is based on tempered pitch and our ears have become accustomed to it, but a lot of Eastern music is based on the natural or justified pitch and the people in those regions have become accustomed to that. This is one of the biggest hurdles to overcome when ears in the West attempt to play music from the East.
So to answer your question, your ears are responding to this overtone series and when you play a note that falls outside of it you will respond to the dissonance and say, "This sounds bloody awful!"
On that last point on dissonance (theory again!) ...try to get a hold of Enesco's "Quarter-tone" sonata. [Georges Enesco/Enescu was one-time teacher of Yehudi Menuhin]
It sure did bugger up western ears for a long time, but it demonstrated that there are definitely more than 12 tones in music - and that they can be put to good use.
As has probably been mentioned before, you do not need to know any theory to be a good musician, just the ability to undertand, recognise and apply the terms if they were explained. Greatly simplified, much the same way as a (ficticious) deaf & illiterate person would see the colours red, green, blue, etc the same way as anyone else would. His names for them would different, but there would be no mistaking which one he was perceiving.
I know a multi-instrumentalist who knows absolutely nothing about theory, but applies the elements of it just by using his ears. Michael, you'd be astonished by the man - and you'd have been justified in earlier threads in ranting on about 'use your ears'.
The man is question plays fiddle and 'chop' mandolin in bluegrass style very well in a bluegrass setting. In an Irish setting, when he plays guitar backing to Irish reels, jigs etc that he's not familiar with, if you watch and listen to him, the first thing you notice is that he's got the rhythm spot-on after hearing the first few bars. He's now listening intently to the melody - you can tell by his his face that he's not quite sure of the key (or tonal structure or whatever) - so he sticks to playing octaves. By the end of the 5th bar he's heard all of the notes that comprise the 1st part of the tune, so maybe he'll add a 5th on to the octave chord he was playing, maybe a full harmonic chord depending on the tune. Same routine for the 2nd part. By the end of the 2nd round he's now in full flight, and given just about the best accompaniment anyone could possibly give. More to the point, he just demonstrated the contents of a small music theory book on Irish accompaniment, without ever having read it.
So I guess the answer to the original question is : yes, for most people - but not for my mate, one of a kind, one of the best musicians in the world.
Just thinking about the bitching earlier on this thread - I take no sides, ever. Just thought it would be appropriate to say that this applies both to the martial arts and Irish sessions : "Without balance, there can be no strength".
Yes, I know all this stuff about the twelve tones. Well, that is, I didn't always know it, but I learnt it long ago. Did learning it help? I think on balance, yes.
But what do people who play whistle think about 12? They only have halve 8. Do they ask why only 8? Do they ever wonder why their holes are different sizes? The answer, of course is that with the vast majority of diddley stuff, it doesn't matter.
But then they hear the Beare Island reel and it takes a leap of hearing and consequential technique to split a hole.
Going back to my original question. All I am saying is that some people just split that hole as naturally as spreading butter. Others find they have to be shown. Neither may end up a better or worse musician.
But there are people, however, who just can't get that split hole by themselves, and yet they resolutely won't be told.
Jim, there's also a whole lot of microtonal music by the early 20c Czech (?) composer Haba - a number of string quartets in quarter-tones and even one in 1/6th tones. Actually, Haba's works aren't all that difficult to listen to, possibly because he had to bear in mind the musicians and possible fingering problems they had to overcome when playing those quartets; and they're fairly short works. Anyway, I found my ears got used to the microtones quite quickly.
In Pete Cooper's collection of Irish fiddle music (Irish Fiddle Solos - 64 pieces for Violin, Schott ED12734) there are half-a-dozen or more tunes which he points out as having quarter-tones between the natural and the sharp, especially the 3rd and 6th of the scale, which "are a valuable expressive resource".
How useful is a bit of music theory?
How useful is a bit of music theory?
Some people seem to need their knowledge of rythms, keys, modes etc formalized into standard western notation, otherwise they struggle. And some people seem to just get along fine by having a deep understanding of it on a purely subconscious level.
What I'm referring to here is quite simple. If you don't know it, you'll be a crap musician. But you don't need to know it on any formal basis. Intuition can be enough.
A problem can arise, however, when you think you have it nailed by intuition, but really you are floundering in the dark, though this is a difficult one to judge for yourself. You have to ask yourself the question, when hearing tunes, do you know instantly what the notes are just by the sound of them and the "feel" of the tune. If you struggle to hear the notes correctly, your intuition is maybe letting you down. If this is the case, you may well benefit from learning a bit of theory.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I would say the intuitive part is the real meat of the subject, but having a standard terminology for talking about it, even if it’s only in your own head, is very helpful.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by Bob himself
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I think it varies between each person. For me, I started classically and I got a bit of theory and it makes things easier for me. I wonder what it would be like if I didn't start off with it ?_?
Cheers,
Armand
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by armandale
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Just to add to what I said, I'd say that having some sort of knowledge in music theory would only benefit you. It'd help and make things a bit more clear as well.
Cheers,
Armand
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by armandale
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Actually, if you’re sticking strictly to unharmonized melody, there’s only a limited amount of standard theory involved. Once you get into harmony, there’s a whole world of concepts and theoretical models that can help you talk and think about what your mind and ears understand.
I’ve tried to study music theory from books, but the only way it’s ever been very fruitful is when I first have a concept in my head (and ears) and the book gives me some words to attach to the concept and maybe some theoretical connections I hadn’t noticed before.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by Bob himself
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I don't know music theory, though I can read from the dots to a very limited extent, if its in the key I know.
Now last week, someone gave me a sheet to learn a tune from. So I learned the tune to the point where I could play it - and lo and behold I find I don't play it quite as written. I just KNOW that the D in the 15th bar should be a Csharp. If you play D it just doesn't quite sound as good - although it is not completely glaringly badly wrong.
I guess that's a little bit of what you're talking about Michael. Intuitive music theory. I can't begin to tell you what mode the tune is in. Its a B minor of some sort.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by showaddydadito
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I suspect that there will be opportunities for those who seem
to jump on Michael every chance they get these days just for
the sake to do it again, I wonder if they could just imagine that
someone else started this thread and then answer it
earnestly.
Anyway.
Michael, as discussed previously I’m always amused by the
people who get hot and bothered about theory and want to
shoo others away from it – this obviously stems from a fear of it
either that’s it’s too hard (which it’s not, not the amount you
would need for this music anyway) or a fear that it will turn you
into a robot which is nonsense.
Also, theory is just applying names etc to what you already do
(or formalize it as you put it)
What could possible be wrong with that – surely it gives
people a better understanding of what they are doing – and
this is a good thing if it prevents a strummer like myself from
backing a mixoldyian tune as if it was a major tune.
That being said it should be done in tandem with the music,
and not as a mathematical subject where the link between the
theory and application would be lost – that’s just geekiness.
I agree with you that of course intuition is enough, afterall
theory came after the music.
But your thread is pointed at those who think they understand it
on a sub-conscious level but don’t really – and I’d imagine that anyone who thinks they know and don’t will never find out the
truth – this could be related to the ego thread.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
No doubt, theory is less crucial for melody players than it is for backers, and no doubt intuition reigns supreme -- an intellectual understanding of how music goes together doesn't really help a person DO it until that person can begin to convert that knowledge into intuitively generated action.
But I also agree that theory would be helpful for the intuitive player, as a check and balance. Music is a little like grammar in that regard -- you can believe that your ear can be trusted, but you can be wrong.
But I can think of two other defenses for learning theory. One is that people have different ways of learning. Some of us approach things in a left-brained manner; others approach them in a right-brained manner. Those among us who are more left-brained tend to want to learn the logic behind stuff first and then perhaps struggle to merge it into intuitive behavior. Others among us gravitate toward learning intuitively and then perhaps struggle to learn the language of the discipline or the logic behind it.
The other reason is just for the pleasure of it. I guess I believe that learning why and how something works provides another way of appreciating it. Think about whiskey and whisky, for example -- I love the stuff just because, but I also enjoy picking up on regional differences, the nuances that make one different from another. Knowledge just makes the enjoyment of it more whole.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by cuchulain54
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I think it's relatively useful, compared to some other things.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by Dr. Dow
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
It doesn't hurt, and sometimes it helps. Sometimes I wish I got my theory in a class, rather than in bits and pieces along the way. Deliberate study often produces a better foundation than mucking about in a random fashion.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by AlBrown
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Very quick from Jim Troy, but as Michael is now my hero, I must protest.
Musical theory SHOULD help one a lot, and I know some classical violinists sound stilted on the fiddle, and James Galway never sounds confident with Irish stuff.
To illustrate. I have been "playing" a mandolin for 30 something years. I sat in the house and played slow airs, by working out where to put my fingers. I do not know any of the notes on a mandolin. I also learnt songs like this.
Now if someone wanted to sing "Carrickfergus" I would think "I know that". But then they would sing it in C, and I don't know what key I played it in, I just knew where to put my fingers. How was I supposed to know that you could play the same tune by putting your fingers on different frets? Why do you think I played the bodhran as well?
Anyway a few years ago I learnt a few scales, and it makes things a lot easier. I had to ask JfiddlerH questions such as "If it is in Bb which note is doh?" Having been shown this I cou;ld then work it out, as to me a scale is doh, ray, me. I still don't know any notes on the mandolin, with the exception of GDA and E for obvious reasons. Our guitar player used to have great discussions about this, I think he thought I was winding him up. Sometimes one's reputation can be damaging.
Anyway if someone now sings "Carrickfergus" in A,Bb,C,D,E,F, or Aminor, I should be ok..
So a bit of theory helps, and you cannot get any more basic theory than mine. Drumming theory however, 2/4 4/4 time and all that is still a mystery, which is why I aways advise bodhran players not to read books or listen to cds about "how to play the bodhran". You end up with a rhythm, but an inability to change with the music. And you forget to listen.
To conclude, my darling boy plays guitar, and knows theory. It never ceases to amaze me that he can just lift a mandolin or whistle and play something, even though he does not play these instruments. He obviously knows the notes.
PS: just to say hello to M.G. Hi, Michael.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Musical theory is surely one of the most gloriously gut-wrenchingly achingly impenetrably mathematical self-generating artistic wonders of the natural world, representing with mere marks on paper the infinitely variable interplay between physical sound, human emotion and universal spirituality. Who in their right mind could possibly NOT want to know about this??
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by cyber-bullying is a criminal offence
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
maxF what you decribed are the dots.
Theory doesn't have to be about the dots, it can have more to do with the music itself, someone showing you something
on the fiddle and then explaining what it was - differences
between Dorian and Minor for example - doesn't have to be gut wrenching,or a maths exam, you can hear it in action.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Depends.
What theory do you mean?
If it's WEAM then some of it's ok, most of it is not relevant.
Because: this is not WEAM.
# Posted on November 2nd 2005 by Pól
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
What's WEAM ?
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by Guernsey Pete
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Wobbly Elephants Arranging Madrigals, of course.
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by Q
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
IMO, music theory is very helpful. It can really add to your playing too. Now, some people do just fine without it because they have excellent ears, but others need to know. I love knowing all the technical stuff and learning more, so while I may not need as much theory as I know, I plain like knowing it.
Ironically, I'm turning in a paper for my college class tomorrow on the basics of music theory. Everyone hope I get an A!
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by TJ
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
How could you be so cruel as to attack the innocent and defenceless Jim?
By the way, "crap" musicians are still better than those who do not play.
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Jim, it goes like this (and the bear Island reel is cracking illustration) ...
If your intuition moves you to play a G sharp in the first bit of The Bear Island, then you don't need to know it's a G sharp. And you don't need to know the chord is an E major.
However, if you struggle, the "knowledge" that it's a G sharp and the "knowledge" of the corresponding E major triad (B nat, G sharp, E nat) is a help.
The important point I'm trying to get across though is that if you have trouble hearing that there is a note in the beginning of that tune tune that is half way between two notes you would normally play, the knowledge that there IS an option between those two notes and that it changes the chord to E maj from E min is helpful. The knowledge that you are playing a "major third" rather than a "minor third" is helpful. The knowledge of what major and minor thirds are is helpful.
Though, If you've been playing the mandolin for "30 something years", and "If it is in Bb which note is doh?" ... I respectfully refer my honerable freind to a discussion I posted not so long ago....
http://www.thesession.org/discussions/display.php/7959
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
A bit of theory is useful - theory is really a way of breaking music down into terms that let people communicate musical ideas using words. However I agree, when people get carried away with it it usually leads to no good. There's a lot of wiggle room between people who haven't a clue of any of the notes on their instruments & some bombastic free-jazzer for the rest of us to occupy.
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by Mad Baloney
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I guess theory is useful when you have to explain something that you do (instinctively) to someone else. I love reading about theory but I have almost no ability to retain it for longer than a couple of days because I don't use it regularly enough. I guess if I was teaching I might force myself to retain the info a bit better.
Also theory can be useful to work out why you are having a problem with something musically and the Beare Island Reel might be a good example for most accompanists when they hear the tune first - what the...? I usually play an E chord that has no 3rd in it at the start of that tune. Full on Emajor sounds a little too defined.
I guess what this all amounts to is saying that intuitive learning is better, but when you get stuck, theory can sometimes find you a way around the barrier.
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by Donough
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
You’re missing the point Larsheen.
MIcho Russell etc may not have bothered about theory
because they knew it instinctively. That’s what this thread is
about I think.
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Ah no, it is you I fear who misses the point. (this could go on
forever)
Anyway, my main point is that when people hear the word
theory they imagine “gut-wrenchingly achingly impenetrably
mathematical” and anyone involved in this Withcraft couldn’t
possible be interested in “getting on with trying to play the
tunes.” (you say that as if we’ve no interest in the music)
But I’m not the one who started the thread, and one of the
main points in the opening post is “But you don't need to know
it on any formal basis”
This is the point I think you missed when you said “Micho
Russell, Paddy Canny, Sonny Murray etc never worried about
theory, their lack of knowledge of it”
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Surely Michael you are not suggesting that your old buddy cannot play? Our fiddle player went one better. He had never heard of scales, hadn't a clue what they were. Mind you he was only about sixty years old.
And yes, Jim, as a qualified English teacher who has never taught English, I can agree that there should have been a comma.
Michael only tries his best.
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Spot on Larsheen, I agree wid you, just learn them off the cd or tape or at your session and all the theory in the world won't make you a better player.
Best put in more practice than worrying about it. I leave the theory to the backers, but I've met a few that could blind you wid theory and still make a hash of their playing.
Maybe more people should just concentrate on the practical skills of playing and listen more.
And Bodhran Bliss, catch on to yerself and stop making an eejit of yerself by displaying your monumental ignorance. Maybe the your handle should be Blissfully Unaware. Best keep it that way, the shock would probably be too much for you.
# Posted on November 3rd 2005 by Judge Judy
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
If I understood theory, bugger being the best in the world, already achieved, I'd be the best in the universe.
And how do you play martial arts? Bit like martial music is it?
But in my humble way, I have nothing against beginners.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Didn't you guys catch the typo? It was supposed to say "marital arts", which is, of course, much more impressive. How about a keg of Guinness, a pot of tea, a brand new pair of shoes, new house, new car?
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by GaryAMartin
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
What’s your problem BB, trying to mock both my music and my interest in martial arts. With no false modesty I can guarantee that I’d be very welcome at most sessions. Can you say the same?
Intense but relaxed focus, timing, speed, sitting within the moment, still but moving, all can be found in both the music and martial arts but I’m fairly sure you haven’t a clue what I’m talking about.
Unless you’re physically unable why don’t you move up to a real instrument and learn the repertoire instead of thumping the moronic drum.
If you love this music I can’t see why you’d be content with the drum with its obvious extreme limitations. And I don’t want a big debate about the drum, like death and taxes they will always be with us. No doubt this will give you an opportunity to bang your own drum, again.
Yes Jim, you can worship at the court of Queen Sal, all supplicants welcome.
GaryAMartin, you sound as if you'll make someone a good wife. See if you can pick up someone on the session.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Judge Judy
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Jim I would never do a disgusting thing like spit on anyone. You should seek urgent therapy if you like that sort of thing, although I don't suppose you're hurting anyone with your celestial perversions.
I assume you're talking about M Gill? Michael and me don't suffer fools gladly but other than that I don't think he could survive long in my tender mercies, so your attempts at matchmaking are doomed.
How about GaryAMartin for Michael as he sounds very domesticated though a maybe a wee bit materialistic?
You can call me Sally.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Judge Judy
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Sssssh!
Don't talk too loudly about this theory!
Messrs. Bush and Blair might invade the site looking for SMD!
Bx
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by briantheflute
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Someone mentioned Micho Russell. I believe this to be true....
At school the teacher was giving out about the music scale and drawn on the blackboard was the staff and eight notes.
MR is asked how many notes are in the scale.
SIX!
Teacher is concerned, asks again, same answer, ...and after repeat of scene, MR is whacked on the back of the knuckles with a ruler, and in exasperation the teacher asks "Why do you keep saying SIX when there EIGHT notes on the blackboard?"
BECAUSE THERE"S ONLY SIX HOLES ON A WHISTLE!
I was lucky enough to play with this lovely man twice, and you don't need theory when you charm music from a whistle or flute like he did!
Brianx
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by briantheflute
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
You're very welcome Larsheen. Your comments about playing the music are intelligent and well informed. You can call me Sally.
Briantheflute, you are the most Godawful name dropper on this site. You strike me as a deeply creepy, touchy-feely type with very bad intentions.
I wouldn't trust you as far as I could throw you, though with my training I could probably throw you further than I could trust you.
Many of us have played with some of the greats but we don't have to constantly tell everyone about it.
I suspect that you are deeply unsavoury as a person but have managed to carve out a career for yourself because you're a good player. This does not excuse you.
Keep your facile, obscure political comments to yourself as I don't see they have much relevance on an Irish music site.
You can call me psychoSal, if indeed I allow you to address me at all.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Judge Judy
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Again Briantheflute I think the point is missed (are people
doing this deliberately??)
Micho Russell knew this stuff instinctively.
I don't have the natural talent of Micho Russell.
Do you ?
And it's not just the backers that need to know it – for
eg. If you want to add some variation to a tune, are you
1. Going to just give someone else’s variation that you learnt
from a CD, or
2. Do you instinctively know how do to that because you have
the natural talent of Micho Russell or
3. Because you know a bit of theory can you provide it from
within yourself.
I think when people hear the word theory they think of pages and pages of mathematical music - which is not what we're talking about here when referring to theory
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
All melody players must know enough theory to yell at the accompanist properly when they're cocking everything up, or at the very least, enough to realize that the accompanist is cocking things up and needs a yelling at. As for melody players who aren't even aware the accompanist is ruining everything, maybe they should take up knitting.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Kerri Brown
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
There you are, Kerri! Have you finished my scarf yet?
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Q
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
And Q over takes Conan on the smart alec stakes !!!
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
psychosal (I'd like to call you Sally, but I'm probably not allowed), I also think Larsheen knows what he's talking about, but I wish he'd pay more attention to BegF before trashing the notions of formal theory being irrelevant to some, and yet help to others.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Huffy Puffy, Sally.
I play a number of instruments but at a "Tunes" session I would stick to the bodhran because I can greatly enhance the overall effect. And don't worry about name dropping, some of the "greats" slip my name into conversations all the time and it doesn't bother me.
And as for you grovellers on this site, I've a hurling stick, so I don't need to move gracefully.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Matt, you'll get your scarf when I get my freezerfull of wild haddock.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Kerri Brown
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
What will half a tin of tuna get me?
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Q
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Michael of course you can call me Sally. I'm not such a dragon as these posts would make out. I can't stand bullsh*t and I call it for what it is.
As for you Bodrhan bliss, you can stick to pshycoSal as you seem to be implying a threat to hit me with a hurling stick. If hitting women with a weapon is your bag, then you've picked the wrong one, but I can't say I'm surprised.
You seem to be under the delusion that what you do enhances the music but you probably couldn't lay down a 4/4 or 9/8 or 2/4 beat, so what good are you other than a plodding and probably too loud noise that prevents the lead players hearing each other.
I strongly suspect that you could never reach session standard on a melody instrument, otherwise why wouldn't you? Where's the joy in banging a drum compared to playing tunes. Those that can do, those that can't stick to the drum.
I suppose I should have let you ramble on unchallenged as you condemn yourself without my help, with your risible and childish comments, but then you are blind to that. There is often an undercurrent of violence in your threads. Do you imagine yourself a dangerous man? You are probably more a danger to the music in a session than you are with your hurling sticks and metal bars.
Finally, your obsessive self-promotion and puffery is probably a sign of a deep (and understandable) inferiority complex. Good players let their music do the talking.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by Judge Judy
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
How much do you charge to psychoanalise people are is it free.
To understand the drum, you need to understand Irish music. And yes I could be another whistle player or mandolin player, one of the many, but it is much better being the only bodhran bliss.
And such a lot of presumptions. Too loud on the drum, inferiority complex, good players let their music do the talking. You couldn't presume to tell me which horse wins the 3.30 at Newmarket tomorrow by any chance?
You are right about one thing. I haven't a clue what 4/4 or 9/8 or 2/4 beat is. As the old man once said to John Sheehan of the Dubliners, "Can you read music or are you just talented?" I obviously come into the latter category, but even I couldn't play without music, a bit pointless anyway don't you think.
As for hitting women with hurling sticks, nothing sexist about me.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Forgot to mention, when I am at a session, I am the lead player.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Sally, (thanks for that) I'm afraid you may do Mr Bodhran Bliss a disservice.
Yes he's an eedjit. And yes he will probably never be a musician (though I juggle cynicism with eternal optimist). The problem with him though, is not his irritating comic arrogance, but his sincerity. He really believes the self promotion he spouts. I'm afraid that he probably does not imagine him self to be a dangerous man (even though he is undoubtedly a danger to the music).
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Now they are all at it. A poor wee old man like myself, being attacked. That's these youngsters for you today, you'd be afraid to go out the door.
I knew Michael would come to my defence. EEjit, yes, and we are well aware of your definition of musicians, even rules out Sally as she plays a whistle instead of a flute. I mean.
Just one thing, self promotion?
Put it this way. I go into a session with a drum, people ask are you any good? I say, "Oh no, I just try to play along". Now after two tunes they are sitting saying, "Jaysus he's brilliant".
So I am going to look like one of those self modest condescending prats?
I think not.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I forgot to put after brilliant "albeit on a humble bodhran"
Michael, you and Sally would make a lovely couple. I could buy youse a drum as a wedding present.
# Posted on November 4th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
As you're new PsychoSal you may not be aware that Mr Bliss tends to miss quote people to prove his point.
Michaels never ruled out musicians as inferred by BB
He's hierarchy thread recently was about musicial instruments
not musicians - big difference.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
"What will half a tin of tuna get me?"
Half a ball of yarn and one knitting needle.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Kerri Brown
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Bodrhan bliss, what a sad delusional little man you are (no matter what your height). You have condemned yourself with your own words and only confirmed everything I wrote about you, but only you cannot see that.
I can't predict the winner of a race but I can build up a picture of you from your own words and sorry reading they make indeed. You are too boring and predictable to cross swords with so I'll leave it at that. Even if you're doing it as a windup it's become very tedious and you should change your tune. Oops, sorry I forgot, you can't even do that.
You with the big long name, I have many friends and contacts and I know of Briantheflute through them, hence the venom of my delivery. Defend him if you must but there's many will be right-onning my verdict.
Michael, I wouldn't waste time waiting for BB to become musical after 30 years of inertia and messianic self-belief.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Judge Judy
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I don't know what this different theory is, as regards some of the postings. Quite simply if someone has studied music does this not include the theory of music? So some teachers have said to me.
I don't know, I never studied music.
I would add that the point I made about Micho Russell was to further the point made by BegF where he said " knew it instinctively".
I'm a great believer that people don't have to read music, to be able to play it.
Bx
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by briantheflute
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Very frequently the study of music does NOT include theory.
It always unsettles me when I meet a fine player (usually a piano player) that can read anything you put in front of them, but have no clue what yr after if you ask for a "D chord".
They usually make some allusion to their 15 years of training and never heard of such nonsense.
As a melody player, if you can read, or play by ear, it doesn't help at all, you don't need it. As an alongsider, it is a big help to determine what chords are needed where ( bearing in mind that it takes a little more doing to identify 2,3, or even 6 simulanteous notes than it does 1), and several other things that strict melodists shouldn't worry their pretty little heads about.
It's useful, it's not necessary . I was asking Antoinette McKenna about how to set up accompaniment and she said she had no Idea, she'd been doing it all her life and didn't remember learning it. I know a couple of champion guitarists that learned everything they ever needed by playing along with the radio.
I agree with you ""people don't have to read music, to be able to play it" I also believe that one shouldn't regard themselves as a complete musician if they can't play by ear...but that's a private opinion ( at least it was) and I don't consider one to be evil or duncical it they can't ...yet.
That's not at all what we're talking about here.
I agree with MG that intuition can be misleading, that's not why I do it. I do it because I frequently get stuck in places where I don't have my "yoke" : I get musical Ideas, I can make a few scribble marks on a piece of paper and if it works, I keep the paper to remember to try it when I get a chance. If it doesn't work, I still have the amusement akin to say... a crossword puzzle.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Owell Mabee
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Briantheflute, I too don't believe you have to read music to
be able to play it, and in this music I think in can do more harm than good, unless you're aware of shortcomings of it.
I don't view reading music as been what we mean by theory
as discussed here.
Jim - this has been niggling at you for a while, do you really think this is a right v wrong thing. It might be better to address it full on rather than throw in digs every now and then.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Larsheen - again you miss the point.
Point out where it's said that withourt formal theory you are a crap musician.
What is is been said that IF you don't get in instinctively THEN
you would benefit from learning it.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
"I'm a great believer that people don't have to read music, to be able to play it."
Brian, that's not a believing thing, it's a plain fact. We all know excellent musicians who can't read a note & don't need to, to play brilliant music.
One of the finest musicians I know can't read a note & yet he is a brilliant Accordion player & my favourite Guitar man in a session.
Written music is a simply a handy wee tool.
We could all survive, quite happily without ever seeing written music ever again. But I'm sure we would all be very unhappy if we had every tune book ever printed, but couldn't actually play a note!
Music theory, you can take it or leave it, it's not what's really important!
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Ptarmigan
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
"Written music is a simply a handy wee tool"
Ptarmigan, we're not arguing that point
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
"Look BegF", Larsheen in your impatience with me to agree
with you you have conveniently left out some of the quote.
Michael said in the first post "If you don't know it, you'll be a
crap musician. But you don't need to know it
on any formal basis. Intuition can be enough"
Whereas you're paraphrased as saying "your thought that
without formal theory you are a crap musician."
Can you not see the differnce ?
The best way to learn this music is by ear - few will disagree
with that.
But saying "Formal theory will never ever help you play trad" is
not true.
Never ? You're saying that there is no one out there who didn't
get it instinctively benefited from some theory (and not the
theory of mathimatical music but of practical
explanation ie" look listen to this, this is the difference
between dorian and minor, this sound here listen to it,hear that note ?)
As for the backing V melody :
"And it's not just the backers that need to know it – for
eg. If you want to add some variation to a tune, are you
1. Going to just give someone else’s variation that you learnt
from a CD, or
2. Do you instinctively know how do to that because you have
the natural talent of Micho Russell or
3. Because you know a bit of theory can you provide it from
within yourself."
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I dispute that, Larsheen. Of course melody players would benefit from formal theory. One of the main benefits - and it's a big one - would be a deeper understanding of key changes, and why the 'lift' you can get between tunes works some times but not other times, despite ostensibly being the same key change (modal shmodal, eh?).
Although, to the listener and perhaps the formally unschooled player, "key" seems to be a function of harmony and therefore of relevence to the backers only - make no mistake: it's the melody players who dictate key changes, by selecting the next tune.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Q
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
When you insist on assuming that I'm referring to theory books,
then you're agreeing to differ with a point you think I'm making.
Not the point I'm actually making.
Well to agree to differ you must at least understand what
the opposing view is (I obviosly have failed in explaining my point ).
Don't assume that I don't try to play "from the auld heart"
or that you will leave "variation by theory to yourself and whoever" - that is a bit on the patronising and completely missing the point.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
One question though - if you never tried it, how would you know if it helps or not ?
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Re:
1. Going to just give someone else’s variation that you learnt
from a CD, or
2. Do you instinctively know how do to that because you have
the natural talent of Micho Russell or
3. Because you know a bit of theory can you provide it from
within yourself."
I don't believe Micko Russell was born with that talent, I believe he learned it over the years, but not from books & theory but just be listening & listening & listening.
If he then, in later life wished to add a variation it wouldn't have come from some inherited mystical anscestral knowledge & it most certainly wouldn't have come from any musical theory, it quite simply would have come from an almost infinite supply of versions & variations of tunes which he had spent a lifetime storing away in his head & could pull out & use as & when needed.
I'm sure that Micko, like myself and countless other trad musicians, wouldn't have known dorian or minor if he'd found either in his Corn Flakes & that, to me, is one of the wonderful things about ITM - we don't ever actually NEED to know any of that theory stuff.
You might not like that fact, but nonetheless it is a fact. We don't need any of it to play - all our lives!
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Ptarmigan
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
<Sigh> Ptarmigan, you're missing the point fore fun now aren't you.
Just for the record (broken one at this stage).
This thread is NOT about needing to study theory before you
can play music.
Changing the opposing view point to make you right, doesn't actually make you right.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory? One question though - if you never tried it, how would you know if it helps or not ?
All I'm saying is that we don't need to try it, because quite simply, we know we don't need it.
If others choose to use it & find that it helps them, that's fine & good luck to them, but if I choose not to use it, that doesn't mean that I'm necessarily missing a trick.
I might get to the shops faster if I travelled by Skateboard, but I'll get to the shops quite happily all my life, by just walking & I don't ever need to use a Skateboard.
Just because the board is faster, doesn't make it a better way to travel.
Consider all the things I will miss if I only ever travel by skateboard?
Big isn't always better than small.
Fast isn't always better than slow.
Complicated isn't always better than simple.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Ptarmigan
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I agree with your last three sentences, Ptarmigan.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
First theory, then logic, now skateboards?! What have you got against skateboards? You'll be saying there's no need for my spider-man comics next.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Q
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I was out playing last night and fully realised that I had underestimated my ability on the bodhran. The fact that there was a lad with a djembe perhaps helped, never seen one of those at a session before, lovely bass sound.
And Michael, sadly you cannot marry Sally. She knows (?) so much about me, that I presume she is already married to me.
So why do I have to play the whistle at home?
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
No, you don't need them Q - send them to me!
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Ptarmigan
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
More knowledge is almost always better than less. Me, I'm a crap musician.
I keep trying to learn it, but it keeps draining out the plughole of my brain anyway. Will keeps trying anyway, brave man that he is.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Zina Lee
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Hey Larsheen, I see you have re-christened me Ptatmigan! You just forgot the -di on the end! But he is in fact my Indian relative, who sadly doesn't have the luxury of a silent P - Ptatmigandi!
Hey Zina - that's a new name for it, isn't it - "the plughole of my brain"
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Ptarmigan
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
when I posted this question i was really careful to phrase it so as to try and not to get into the confrontation situation that so many threads end up in.
What I didn't count on, however, was an attitude from someone that was so closed minded that they couldn't help imposing their prejudice onto my question, when it clearly wasn't there. BegF has tried to explain it, but to no avail.
To confuse:
"If you don't know it, you'll be a
crap musician. But you don't need to know it
on any formal basis. Intuition can be enough"
with:
"without formal theory you are a crap musician."
is just plain crazy.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
But it was a nice try, Michael.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Zina Lee
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Music theory is little more than a way of systematizing things that you hear and understand to be good ways of making music. In the process of systematizing, you will probably get ideas for additional good ways of making music. The "little more" comes when anyone uses it to prescribe or proscribe, rather than DEscribe, how music is made
Most of what you find in music theory books describes Western art music, jazz and pop music and mostly from the point of view of harmony. Except for backers, this is not hugely useful in Irish trad. But if you happen to have some inclination toward systematizing (am I allowed to use that word three times?), you might find it useful to learn about modes and how they like to be altered in certain ways for subtle effects. Or you might come to realize that a cluster of notes can suggest or imply a chord, even when the tune is unaccompanied.
Once you take that point of view, you have a new way of understanding the organization of a tune. Now, some understanding of harmony (chord progressions) *might* actually help you, depending on what you're trying to do. It can certainly be useful if you're composing tunes and might help you advise your backer. Or, if you're into playing variations within a tune, it might guide you a bit there.
Last week, I was listening to a CD from a well-known player who writes lots of tunes. By the end of the CD, I was thinking about how the tunes often didn't seem to go anywhere. The chord progression might be D D D D D D D D D A D D D D D A D... Not that that couldn't work, but two or three tunes in a row with so little harmonic movement starts to sound monotonous, or maybe mono-chord-ous. Here, I thought, is a person who could benefit from some understanding and appreciation of chord progressions.
I think I've talked myself into a position here. I would say that for backing or for composing tunes, some systematic understanding of how music works is very useful. For playing melodies, maybe useful, maybe not.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by Bob himself
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Psycho Sal is RIGHT. Obsessive self promotion and puffery probably is a sign of a deep (and understandable) inferiority complex. You know the type of person she means, always running people down and holding dogmatic opinions.
The sort of person who would say things like "I would be welcome at most sessions", "all you other people won't have a clue" and accusing others of "monumental ignorence" or being an "unsavoury" type of person.
You know the type of person she means. The type that knows everything about people, never having met them, and everything about everything, and looks down at the "less gifted".
Yes such a person probably does have an inferiority complex.
Unless...............they were winding up.
I should be ashamed of myself.
# Posted on November 5th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I had a formal education in music before I stumbled across ITM. My first attempts on the concertina were riddled with errors on account of my assumptions based on my training. I bent over backwards to follow all the rules of Western music and produced the melodies -- but it lacked the flavor and character that I was hearing. When I first had the good fortune to sit down with Noel Hill in 1986 and compare what he was doing to what I had sorted out I was amazed how many rules he was breaking. From that point on I ignored my musical training in my pursuit of ITM.
I realized that certain aspects of music theory applied to ITM, but it wasn't intended that way from its conception. As I met more and more players both locally and from Ireland I could see that music theory had little relevance to their approach. As for me personally I find it to be a great tool when I'm arranging music for the gigs, but most of the time I pretty much leave it locked in a compartment somewhere in my head.
If I hear something in a tune that's unique and I want to understand it I'll reference my training to figure out and attach a definition to it. My feeling is that music theory is the analysis of what musicians already know. Music theory takes something intangible and gives it definition.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Phantom Button
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
That's a great reply mr button. Interesting, isightful and completely in the spirit of the question No judgmental nonsense about what some people falsely perceive as the other side. I'm glad that some people at least realise that this is not a discussion about sides
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Oh yes it is! ...........Oh no it isn't! ................Look out Div, he's behind you!!! .............................................Soon be panto time - yippeeee!
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Ptarmigan
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I think applying the term "intuitive music theory" to the concept of refined ear-hand coordination is nonsense. Refining hand-ear coordination isn't intuitive or theoretical. It's practical and experiential. It *requires* disengagement of the analytical mind. The term "theory" refers only to analytical gymnastics - defining things in such a way they can be communicated without any experiential foundation. Like, for example, when I met some fantastic jazz guitarists who said they didn't "get" Irish backing, and I explained it for them in theoretical language, and they went "OH!" in such a way that it was obvious they thought be able to adequately back Irish music from that point on, and yet not a note had been played.
If you consider just playing well to be "music theory", then the term has no meaning at all. It's like saying existence itself is intuitive understanding of Einstein's theory of relativity.
A few months ago I asked someone to teach me a tune and he said "I'll do better than that, I'll write it down for you!" So then there was the hunt for paper and a pen, then the tedious drawing of lines on the paper, then about a half hour of scribbling while we both sat there silently, then another hour of me trying to make sense of the scribbling, and now, months later I still can't play the damn tune. If he'd just played it a few times with me I'd have had it in 20 minutes. In the light of that experience, I can honestly say I prefer experiential over theoretical tune transmission.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Kerri Brown
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Sorry, Mr Ptarmigan, to engage DIV in a battle of wits is to attack an unarmed man.
Now he may be a clairvoyant or something, knows all about me, without knowing who I am. Could he be jealous of my ability to "noodle on a banjo".
Could he be a serious type, could he be a she? But a serious she.
I begin to lose faith in humanity.
I've got it. Could he/she be from the US of A? I can't think of another explanation.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
But Kerri, isn't that a discussion about learning from ear versus
learning from dots - a completely different thing.
I think we all would prefer "experimental over theoretical tune
transmission".
Jack, I'm interested to know what kind of formal music training you had - was it classical/ jazz /blues/ ITM - as theory must be subsequent to the music (ie blues theory didn't come before
the blues) it can't be general and applies to a certain genre,
so your formal training may not have been relevant in which case you would have been wise to ignore it.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
"But Kerri, isn't that a discussion about learning from ear versus
learning from dots - a completely different thing."
Yes, which is why the vast majority of my post discusses the ridiculousness of the idea of "intuitive music theory"
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Kerri Brown
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Someone please tell me these people are not Irish.
Irish people could not be that gullible, please God know.
Or has the "South" become that Americanised.
I am not attacking Americans by the way, it must just be a different bent on life, a different slant on humour.
And as someone who alas mostly plays melody, especially on a bodhran because my harmonies are poor, I must say again that a knowledge of music theory must be a boon.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Yes, but you base the ridiculousness of the idea on theory can be communicated without any experiential foundation - that doesn't necessarily have to alway be the case.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by BegF
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
As I thought. A sexist (take it like a man) a conservative fascist (dumb bar steward, stupid drunk), no wonder a "div" is a derogatory term in this part of the world.
The insecure Sally may be many things. But Div is a he man.
Got any pics, Big Boy.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
OK, I give up, I surrender. I promise never to respond to the innocents abroad ever again.
How was I to know. No wonder Arnie got elected. Robots must be the "in" thing.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Dudes.
Please stop.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Dr. Dow
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
BegF, to answer your question; I went through a 4-year college course in harmony and music theory and studied keyboards. I covered classical, baroque, renaissance and medieval styles while I was there. After leaving college I became interested in Jazz.
I think music theory comes in handier if you’re playing back-up. Watching Junji’s approach was interesting considering he was a child prodigy and studied music formally as well. Junji would thrive on players that came through town who played in different keys. He once backed up Noel Hill without a glitch as Noel pulled out one concertina after another in various tunings. I’ve also watched him on stage backing up complicated barndances, marches and the like coming at him from people like Conal O’Grada. I remember the night with Conal when Juji came off stage I asked if he had ever heard that tune before. Junji laughed and said, “I never hear that tune before.”
The back-up player I currently work with has a background in Jazz that helps him tackle the modal environment of ITM tonality. He is able to sort out complicated tunes as well and has a lot of different ways to structure his chords around them. He often has a different way to back up the tune on each repetition. He told me he draws on his experience playing jazz, but has also developed his own approach.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Phantom Button
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
So it *is* alright to noodle then?
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Dr. Dow
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I wouldn't call that noodling, but if you can play like either of them -- noodle away.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Phantom Button
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Yes, they are great players...
What on earth are they doing playing with you? Do they feel sorry for you or something?
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Dr. Dow
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
It's simple -- I pay them.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Phantom Button
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Either they've fallen on hard times or you're very rich, then
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Dr. Dow
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
OK, I'll give you all an example:
You assume you know nothing of musical theory and you twiddle about purely by ear on an instrument. In fact, it doesn't even have to be an instrument, you could be simply humming. You discover two notes that sound remarkably similar. You realize that one is higher than the other (though you don't use the terms higher and lower because that's too technical). You discover that for all intense and purposes, these two notes are interchangeable.
If you are singing, it's hard because there is no reference. But if you are on a piano, you notice that the pattern of the layout of the keys is repeated, and that these notes you have discovered that are interchangeable, fall on the same part of the repeated pattern. If you have a guitar, you notice that these notes are twelve of those straight bits of metal things apart. If you are playing a tin whistle, you notice that the fingering is the same, you just have to blow a bit harder or softer.
Now the whole point of my question is: At this basic level, you don't need to know the word octave, you don't need any knowledge of the concepts of simply doubling and halving frequency. Your intuition will suffice.
But what happens next, is that as we continue to teach ourselves, we pick up terms from other people. Terms like octave. And we keep on picking up terms. Then some peoples' heads say "I have enough terms now, thank you". Others are not so closed. Some people get along fine without the terms, though with others, it helps them play.
Me? I have an enquiring mind. I like to ask "but why is there 12 frets between the octave?". So I divide it up into 13 and guess what, it sounds bloody awful.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Can a bit of theuory do any harm, look at it that way.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Just noticed that Div is an ex-boxer. As long as he's not Cuban that should be OK. Hopefully he could turn out to be Audley Harrison.
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by bodhran bliss
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Michael, that's exactly what I meant when I said, "My feeling is that music theory is the analysis of what musicians already know. Music theory takes something intangible and gives it definition."
As for your last query about the 13th division: the 12-note scale is based on a natural phenomenon of overtones. If you were to hold down the pedal on a piano so the strings are free to vibrate and you strike the middle C, there are strings that will vibrate in sympathy based on the overtones. Those notes include the octave, fifths and thirds primarily. If you were to then dampen that C note that you struck you would hear these other strings.
In the natural overtone series this sequence isn't exactly the same if you played one of the notes of the overtone series. Strict adherence to the natural phenomenon is called "Justified pitch," but the piano is tuned according to something called "Tempered pitch." The tempering of the scale equalized the inconsistencies of the phenomenon so the notes would be equally out of tune in each key. Western music is based on tempered pitch and our ears have become accustomed to it, but a lot of Eastern music is based on the natural or justified pitch and the people in those regions have become accustomed to that. This is one of the biggest hurdles to overcome when ears in the West attempt to play music from the East.
So to answer your question, your ears are responding to this overtone series and when you play a note that falls outside of it you will respond to the dissonance and say, "This sounds bloody awful!"
# Posted on November 6th 2005 by Phantom Button
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
On that last point on dissonance (theory again!) ...try to get a hold of Enesco's "Quarter-tone" sonata. [Georges Enesco/Enescu was one-time teacher of Yehudi Menuhin]
It sure did bugger up western ears for a long time, but it demonstrated that there are definitely more than 12 tones in music - and that they can be put to good use.
As has probably been mentioned before, you do not need to know any theory to be a good musician, just the ability to undertand, recognise and apply the terms if they were explained. Greatly simplified, much the same way as a (ficticious) deaf & illiterate person would see the colours red, green, blue, etc the same way as anyone else would. His names for them would different, but there would be no mistaking which one he was perceiving.
I know a multi-instrumentalist who knows absolutely nothing about theory, but applies the elements of it just by using his ears. Michael, you'd be astonished by the man - and you'd have been justified in earlier threads in ranting on about 'use your ears'.
The man is question plays fiddle and 'chop' mandolin in bluegrass style very well in a bluegrass setting. In an Irish setting, when he plays guitar backing to Irish reels, jigs etc that he's not familiar with, if you watch and listen to him, the first thing you notice is that he's got the rhythm spot-on after hearing the first few bars. He's now listening intently to the melody - you can tell by his his face that he's not quite sure of the key (or tonal structure or whatever) - so he sticks to playing octaves. By the end of the 5th bar he's heard all of the notes that comprise the 1st part of the tune, so maybe he'll add a 5th on to the octave chord he was playing, maybe a full harmonic chord depending on the tune. Same routine for the 2nd part. By the end of the 2nd round he's now in full flight, and given just about the best accompaniment anyone could possibly give. More to the point, he just demonstrated the contents of a small music theory book on Irish accompaniment, without ever having read it.
So I guess the answer to the original question is : yes, for most people - but not for my mate, one of a kind, one of the best musicians in the world.
Just thinking about the bitching earlier on this thread - I take no sides, ever. Just thought it would be appropriate to say that this applies both to the martial arts and Irish sessions : "Without balance, there can be no strength".
Jim
# Posted on November 7th 2005 by Worldfiddler
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Yes, I know all this stuff about the twelve tones. Well, that is, I didn't always know it, but I learnt it long ago. Did learning it help? I think on balance, yes.
But what do people who play whistle think about 12? They only have halve 8. Do they ask why only 8? Do they ever wonder why their holes are different sizes? The answer, of course is that with the vast majority of diddley stuff, it doesn't matter.
But then they hear the Beare Island reel and it takes a leap of hearing and consequential technique to split a hole.
Going back to my original question. All I am saying is that some people just split that hole as naturally as spreading butter. Others find they have to be shown. Neither may end up a better or worse musician.
But there are people, however, who just can't get that split hole by themselves, and yet they resolutely won't be told.
# Posted on November 7th 2005 by llig leahcim
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
Jim, there's also a whole lot of microtonal music by the early 20c Czech (?) composer Haba - a number of string quartets in quarter-tones and even one in 1/6th tones. Actually, Haba's works aren't all that difficult to listen to, possibly because he had to bear in mind the musicians and possible fingering problems they had to overcome when playing those quartets; and they're fairly short works. Anyway, I found my ears got used to the microtones quite quickly.
In Pete Cooper's collection of Irish fiddle music (Irish Fiddle Solos - 64 pieces for Violin, Schott ED12734) there are half-a-dozen or more tunes which he points out as having quarter-tones between the natural and the sharp, especially the 3rd and 6th of the scale, which "are a valuable expressive resource".
# Posted on November 7th 2005 by Trevor Jennings
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I think Sally Ryan (aka Judge Judy) is obnoxious, offensive, and has absolutely nothing to contribute to this discussion.
But that's just my opinion.
# Posted on January 27th 2008 by rob_handel
Re: How useful is a bit of music theory?
I second that opinion, but thats just my opinion , or is? perhaps it rob's? hmmm...
# Posted on January 28th 2008 by piobagusfidil