Theory & Impro Do we really need theory?

[aldevis]

Yes! And that's true of all music theory, it doesn't add anything to what we know from the sound. It's a description of what we already know.

I still don't know what I am hearing when I listen to Gil Evans.
It is beautiful, but I can't reproduce it. I don't even know where the downbeat is, sometimes (after only 30 years...)

 

[Bernie]

Not trying to be provocative. Can you sing "have you met Miss Jones" with no backing track?
The hard bit is singing the bridge and getting back to the "A" section in (roughly) the same key.

I don't know the song. There are other songs where I have the same trouble you describe, I would call that "not knowing the song well enough".

 

[aldevis]

Not trying to be funny, but Bernie's avatar reminds me of the first time I've been told that breathing is an involuntary action. The theory behind it almost chocked me.

 

[aldevis]

I don't know the song. There are other songs where I have the same trouble you describe, I would call that "not knowing the song well enough".

But that bridge has been written with that effect in mind, assuming that the performer would have been up to the job, while GSTQ has been written in order to be catchy an easy to memorize (like most national anthems)

 

[BigMartin]

If you improvise, can you tell when you play a note that doesn't fit the chord?

Yes, and when I do that I have a much better chance of resolving it tastefully (to my ears) if I know what the chord is and which "bum note" I've hit. Eg the 4th on a major 7, or the major 3rd on a minor chord. And I mean know that instantly without having to calculate it, because I've spent the hours needed to get that knowledge into my ear and fingers, so to speak. Without some theoretical background that knowledge would have cost me many, many more hours to acquire. My practice time is limited and precious, and I don't understand why anyone would refuse to use a tool that can help them use that time more effectively.

 

[kevgermany]

Yes! And that's true of all music theory, it doesn't add anything to what we know from the sound. It's a description of what we already know.

Theory is the key to understanding. If you want to play without understanding, fine. But don't knock people who want to understand.

 

[kevgermany]

I think that rather depends on how you learn / listen. People differ and I would want/need the explanation. On a Myers-Briggs assessment I come out as INTJ meaning you have to give me facts and information - I have to understand how/why something works. Other learning / personality types work in different ways.

I don't really believe this stuff. Obviously there are different personality types, but I don't think it's all as mechanical and inflexible as you suggest here.

We all have different needs. The mistake is not properly recognising others needs because you don't understand them.

On a different note, do you understand the theory that Boehm used to develop the modern flute? Or the theory that went into the Albert scale? Or why the tone holes on saxes are placed where they are? Or why they're different sizes? Or why a third sounds different in equal temperament to just temperament? Or why we have equal temperament? Or why a violin back affects the sound more than a guitar back does? These all come from application of theory.

It's ok to live in your own world. But many of us want to see a broader picture. And understand. And progress. Please respect us and understand that we go where you don't wish to go yourself.

 

[Nick Wyver]

You can know about chords and stuff without knowing any theory Nick. All the information is in the sound.

Yes, but the piece of paper in front of me with the chord symbols on is not making a lot of noise.

 

[Bernie]

But that bridge has been written with that effect in mind, assuming that the performer would have been up to the job, while GSTQ has been written in order to be catchy an easy to memorize (like most national anthems)

Not sure what point you are making here. I think GSTQ wasn't written to be catchy, I think you could almost say it wrote itself, it's a folk tune.

 

[Bernie]

Yes,

You said earlier that tunes and harmony are two very different things for you: broadly speaking, you thought you could get tunes in your head, but not harmony. If you can tell when you are playing a bum note when you are improvising, that means you have the harmony in your head.

 

[Bernie]

I envy you that ability, is it something that has taken time or could you always do it quite easily?

Rather than immediately answering that question, I'd like to ask you something Jeanette: roughly how long do you think you have spent learning and practising the sax, and how much of that time has been devoted to trying to play by ear, that is, trying to play tunes that you know, without looking at written music.

 

[Pete Thomas]

If you can tell when you are playing a bum note when you are improvising, that means you have the harmony in your head.

To my mind, in an ideal world you don't play bum notes and then recognise them as such, but rather know when you might be about to play one (thanks to your knowledge of theory) and avoid playing it.

One problem with this thread is the word "need" in the title.

People tend to associate that would with something being essential (unless it's qualified by a further context)

• One could argue that everyone needs food. But do they? No,

Oh yes, but they do in the context of staying alive.

• Do people need a house or some shelter to live in?

No, however those people who don't have somewhere to live mostly would consider that they would really like somewhere to live that isn't a cold damp street.

 

[Bernie]

In my experience and others i have observed , there is nothing innate about playing an instrument,

Can I ask you the same question I asked Jeanette Jez: what proportion of your learning and practice time up to now has been devoted to learning to play by ear, and what proportion has been spent learning to play from written music?

 

[Jeanette]

Rather than immediately answering that question, I'd like to ask you something Jeanette: roughly how long do you think you have spent learning and practising the sax, and how much of that time has been devoted to trying to play by ear, that is, trying to play tunes that you know, without looking at written music.

Been learning in total 5 years. Does playing by ear count trying to take part in improvisation of the month?

Jx

 

[Pete Thomas]

and how much of that time has been devoted to trying to play by ear, that is, trying to play tunes that you know, without looking at written music.

I presume you don't mean it, but it's possible people may take this to imply that playing by ear (as opposed to playing from sheet music) by definition, means that no theory is needed or desirable.

I believe that just as someone who only plays by ear can have a great knowledge of theory, someone can be a good sight reader and have no knowledge of music theory (apart from recognising the pitch and length of a mark on a page).

My son when he was three could read quite well, e.g. "Thomas chuffed into the station and ran over the fat controller."

He understood exactly what that meant, but couldn't have told you what a noun, verb or adjective was.

 

[Bernie]

To my mind, in an ideal world you don't play bum notes and then recognise them as such, but rather know when you might be about to play one (thanks to your knowledge of theory) and avoid playing it.

A singer who knows no formal theory at all, who has learned purely by ear, can avoid singing bum notes. Think about the implications of that, in the light of what you say about the meaning of "need".

 

[Bernie]

Been learning in total 5 years. Does playing by ear count trying to take part in improvisation of the month?

Jx

I don't know Jeanette, it depends how you approach improvisation of the month. Do you generally know the tune the improvisation is based on, so that you could play it without reference to the music? Do you try to improvise "by ear", without reference to the music?

 

[Jeanette]

Do you try to improvise "by ear", without reference to the music?

You mean not listen to the backing track?

Jx

 

[Bernie]

Been learning in total 5 years.

Jx

What I had in mind was, how many hours have you spent learning to play by reading music, and how many hours have you spent learning to play by ear? I don't want to know the number of hours, it's more the ratio between the two that is of interest.

 

[Bernie]

You mean not listen to the backing track?

Jx

No, I mean not looking at written music.