Do you know much music theory? Find it useful?

The Boogie Board

Help Support The Boogie Board:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Heritage Softail

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
942
Reaction score
0
Location
Atlanta Ga
After around 30 years of playing, being self taught, reading Guitar Player, Tab books, etc. I finally sought out a really good guitar teacher. Found a guy from Berkley Music, studio musician, recording producer. It was cool to start on the path to knowing why. The first thing I was told is to learn every note on the neck. Arggghhhhh..... But it will be good to understand the music instead of knowing scale boxes and transitions. He said with 6 months of work, most players can make a big leap forward in playing skills. Interesting...

I watched Brad Paisley on this video of a trip to New Orleans and he jammed with a jazz band. He knows the guitar backwards and forwards. Aside of being a great new country player, he ripped it up with the old boys in the jazz quartet. Impressive comand of the instrument.

Anyone out there know music theory and find it practical? How do you put all that knowledge to good use?
 
It's something I highly suggest you take some time to learn, at least the fundamentals. I myself am a music major, and believe it or not, even classical based part writing music theory Ive learned has come in handy in the guitar world. You can apply ALL of it
 
It is very useful to communicate with other musicians. It is only a language. Most people that do not know theory are very painted into a corner and only are familiar with a few styles.

It would be like going to China .... living there the rest of your life and not learning the language at all or very little. Sure you can get by. But you are going to be very limited in what you can do and express.
 
I think it's very useful, i was a piano player first as a kid, then took music classes in college, its very useful especially in communicating with other musicians as well as composing IMO. Plus knowledge is always a good thing
 
Erotomaniac1928 said:
It's something I highly suggest you take some time to learn, at least the fundamentals. I myself am a music major, and believe it or not, even classical based part writing music theory Ive learned has come in handy in the guitar world. You can apply ALL of it

Music major? In what discipline, might I ask?

I'm a masters composition major right now and I'm graduating in a matter of months so I have taken my fair share of theory, composition, orchestration, etc.

Theory is helpful, but should be taught in conjunction with composition, in my mind. Furthermore, listening to lots of music in many different styles doesn't hurt at all. I think my last recommendation would be to take up free improvisation. It does worlds to improve one's listening ear!

Ok, so what does theory help?
First of all, I think the biggest part of being a musician is to accurately reproduce on our instruments the sounds we hear in our heads. That is facilitated by building technical proficiency of the instrument. Most people at this site have this down pat, at least from what I can hear on the recordings presented here.

In contrast to this, theory and composition help develop one's musical sophistication. Basically, it changes what we hear in our head, usually for the better. It helps expand our lexicon of musical ideas. While shredding is all fine and dandy, arpeggios and blazing chromatic passages can lack significant musical meaning, which is one reason why I have likened John Petrucci's solos to etudes. (A musical work designed to advance a student's technique) Cello Etudes by David Popper are one such example of this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=939Yl9w9LBs <--- This really is the cello equivalent of shredding!!
 
I have purposely made myself learn more over the past couple of years,and it has paid off...do I play Zepplin stuff better now? no,..the technique has been there... but I understand harmony much better,which pays off for me in two ways...#1-it has helped me UNDERSTAND what some of the greats were picturing while structuring certain passages, and #2-it has guided me in an area I was lacking in: playing over the changes...I play in an acoustic gig which requires a lot of improv...now I can "create" different stuff on the fly much better-it has opened up new avenues
bottom line: I had to change how I listened to music as well..Its all about the chords....Steely Dan really helped bridge the gap between rock and jazz for me-helped me get it a little better
 
YellowJacket said:
Erotomaniac1928 said:
It's something I highly suggest you take some time to learn, at least the fundamentals. I myself am a music major, and believe it or not, even classical based part writing music theory Ive learned has come in handy in the guitar world. You can apply ALL of it

Music major? In what discipline, might I ask?

I'm a masters composition major right now and I'm graduating in a matter of months so I have taken my fair share of theory, composition, orchestration, etc.

I'm in my second semester at the local JC now, so theory 2, aural skills/sight singing 2, jazz band, etc. I'll most likely go the jazz studies route when I transfer to a 4 year. I do have some interest in composition too. Any advice?
 
Erotomaniac1928 said:
YellowJacket said:
Erotomaniac1928 said:
It's something I highly suggest you take some time to learn, at least the fundamentals. I myself am a music major, and believe it or not, even classical based part writing music theory Ive learned has come in handy in the guitar world. You can apply ALL of it

Music major? In what discipline, might I ask?

I'm a masters composition major right now and I'm graduating in a matter of months so I have taken my fair share of theory, composition, orchestration, etc.

I'm in my second semester at the local JC now, so theory 2, aural skills/sight singing 2, jazz band, etc. I'll most likely go the jazz studies route when I transfer to a 4 year. I do have some interest in composition too. Any advice?

We've been having all these symposiums / discussions with the university lately. A film composer on the discussion panel says that he tells everyone interested in composition to run away!! BAHA! The general, common, belief is that one won't make any money as a composer. You do it because you have to, not because you want to.
Honestly, though. A couple of years of one on one composition instruction will only help one become a better musician. Do that, and also do free improv. Nothing improves one's ear like having to create music on the spot with any sort of framework to follow whatsoever.

Oh, if you want to compose, get a pencil, some manuscript paper, and compose.
 
Learn chords, not just leads. Everybody wants to play like Satriani or Petrucci, but never thinks about the chordal under-pinnings of the tunes they compose and perform.
Learn jazz standards like "All The Things You Are", as well as three chord blues tunes.
If you think guys like Vai can't play stuff like "Stardust", think again.
And don't limit yourself to just listening to guitar players.
 
Wow! Lots of knowledge is music power going on. I have decided to be dedicated to this 6 month challenge. Getting up at 5 a.m. to practice lesson material for a half hour every day. Keeping song practice and improv for after work/wife/x-box Gears of War online locust chainsawing is done. Can't be all work :lol: One idea coming out of the many posts is that catching a night class as one of the many community colleges or larger universities in the music area could be a good idea. :idea:
 
MrMarkIII said:
Learn chords, not just leads. Everybody wants to play like Satriani or Petrucci, but never thinks about the chordal under-pinnings of the tunes they compose and perform.
Learn jazz standards like "All The Things You Are", as well as three chord blues tunes.
If you think guys like Vai can't play stuff like "Stardust", think again.
And don't limit yourself to just listening to guitar players.

+20, dammit!

Jazz chords rule! Don't just stick to power chords when playing gain, also try building alternate chordal patterns. I've found you can get some sweet voicings and a lot more heaviness by selectively adding a few notes here and there. As for clean, I've found chords with added 7ths and 9ths are great. I have a book of jazz chords I started learning before I got swamped with school work.

Also, check out some 'classical' composers from the 20th century.
Dmitri Shostakovich - Check out his Cello Sonata and his 5th and 10th symphonies. He has a very interesting approach to harmony.
Hindemith - Symphonic Metamorphosis. (GREAT PIECE)
Bela Bartok - Concerto for Orchestra. Also, his six String Quartets.

Heritage Softtail: Only 30min on lesson material!!??? =-o Dude, I've done an hour daily on Cello for technique gamuts. (not including everything else I have to learn) If you guys want some ideas on that, I can provide some. I've not applied them to guitar yet but I'd imagine they are highly effective there as well. Metronome is a MUST!

I sadly haven't spent much time on guitar in the last five years because of music school. I decided learning a more 'classical' instrument that was not Piano was of very high importance to improving as a composer. It allowed me to play in a student orchestra where I learned a lot about the rehearsal process, part making, and orchestration. I know with how much I have developed my left hand through cello, I am positioned to make some great gains on the six string. When I am done school--in four or five years--maybe I'll take a year to focus on guitar and make some massive improvements in my playing. Until then, I have to suffer with practicing once or twice a week.
 
I have been teaching guitar on and off for 32 years. If you are going to study chords .... Become familiar with the CAGED system. ..... After that the Mickey Baker Method has been a standard for a long time.

Nothing wrong with going to school, But the is a ton of free lessons and videos available on the web. Skype is being used by a number of my friends to give live lessons. Live video lesson are around and I may be doing this before long.

There are a lot of great free lessons at http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Category/Premier_Clinic.aspx This is one of the best collections of free lessons I have found. Plenty of free video lessons here and elsewhere.
 
stephen sawall said:
I have been teaching guitar on and off for 32 years. If you are going to study chords .... Become familiar with the CAGED system. ..... After that the Mickey Baker Method has been a standard for a long time.

Nothing wrong with going to school, But the is a ton of free lessons and videos available on the web. Skype is being used by a number of my friends to give live lessons. Live video lesson are around and I may be doing this before long.

There are a lot of great free lessons at http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Category/Premier_Clinic.aspx This is one of the best collections of free lessons I have found. Plenty of free video lessons here and elsewhere.

Props for the links. Totally worth checking out!

Not to discount books, online lessons, etc. but it is a completely different beast from a good university / conservatory program. I think private study and instruction is a great way to learn guitar. If you want to learn a lot about music beyond the paradigm of a single instrument, a good music program can help out a lot. Ultimately, each musician has to decide what is the correct approach for his or her individual situation.

Oh, even IF one is in music school, one should not abstain from snooping online every once in awhile. My brother wants to work on his theory so I'll be sure to send the link to him!
 
I completely agree about the university experience. You can find all the same information else where ..... but this well not be the same or likely you well stumble across as wide of a pallet of information.

A number of the people for instance at Premiere Guitar are involved with university's or have been. For some that are not going to take a full step in or are very limited to time may find all they need in my links or suggestions .... but this well never replace school or real world application / experience.

On the link if you go to "filter by issue:" and choose the first one "All Issues" you well have years worth of lessons.
 
gts said:
Music Theory/ Harmony is indispensable but training yourself to "hear" the theory/ harmony is equally if not more indispensable.

Ain't this the truth! This is the difference between 'knowing' and 'memorizing'. I often don't understand people who just blindly learn and follow 'rules' while working on harmony assignments. Academia in general is obsessed with the 'score' when really, what is heard is far more important. Just because you can see something in the printed word does not mean it is terribly important.

After you get the basics down I'd also suggest finding something you like/ know and learn to understand the harmony in that piece. It might make it easier to understand.
At one point in my life I could analyze the structure of a piece to death. Really all it is is math. But hearing those relationships was harder til I discovered modal harmony. Then it started to become more clear. Why? Because that was the 'jazz' I liked at the time. I didn't know the music I liked was not based on the tonic or relative minor but on Dorian, Phrygian modes etc . Sadly I stopped studying about that time because I was going broke (Berklee wasn't cheap) and I had been in a motorcycle accident. But boy the world of music was beginning to open up. Wish I could have continued....

Music in a major scale is only really tolerable with a flat 7 or a sharp 4 . . . I refuse to compose music in ionian.

Improv is also invaluable. I knew a few studying around the corner at the other BCM (Boston Conservatory of Music) and none could improvise. But many at Berklee who improvised better had a harder time playing a piece as written and sight reading.

We have the opposite problem at University. You remove the sheet music and most musicians stare back with vacant eyes, rather like Cattle. I hate playing music off of sheets because if I improvise, then I don't have to deal with 'mistakes'. haha!! It is so frustrating working on this Elgar concerto. Everything is going well and then BAM, I miss a shift and throw one run. Whole recording scrapped! BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
And yet, when all is said and done, learning balls hard classical repertoire is the shortest and steepest possible climb for building technique, something which is really time demanding on an instrument from the violin family.

I think my biggest regret is being self taught on guitar when I've had years of lessons both on Cello and on Piano. I was watching some of the teaching videos and realizing that I could now have at least four times the chops if I hadn't attempted to reinvent the wheel myself. The good news is that I kind of have my own thing I do on the instrument so my licks and whatnot are somewhat more personal. Furthermore, Cello has me thinking about guitar in a different way than most, something I can pass onto my students. The most useful concept is one of breaking down technical challenges into smaller, more manageable units. If you can figure out all the problems the brain has to solve to execute a passage, you can work on each one individually and then combine the lot of them. This really cuts down the learning time substantially.
 
I see it as like learning a language.

If you got to school and learn English, you will learn a lot of useless bs that you'll never use, but you will have a much better understanding of it through formal training. Although there are always people that can do fine without a formal knowledge, but I feel you have a better connection with the instrument if you know theory.
 
gts said:
Music Theory/ Harmony is indispensable but training yourself to "hear" the theory/ harmony is equally if not more indispensable.
Oddly hearing or knowing what I'm hearing is where I suffer most.

After you get the basics down I'd also suggest finding something you like/ know and learn to understand the harmony in that piece. It might make it easier to understand.
At one point in my life I could analyze the structure of a piece to death. Really all it is is math. But hearing those relationships was harder til I discovered modal harmony. Then it started to become more clear. Why? Because that was the 'jazz' I liked at the time. I didn't know the music I liked was not based on the tonic or relative minor but on Dorian, Phrygian modes etc .

I am just getting started on this learning adventure, so this may be a total noob question. How does one start to analyze the structure of a song? I have in mind "Telegraph Road" by Knopfler, two totally different moods in the song, as reflected in one lead sounding sort of majorish and the other a minor vibe. Knopfler does not play fast but seems to be good at communicating a vibe. Seems to know how to place notes. That is the real issue.
 
Heritage Softail said:
I am just getting started on this learning adventure, so this may be a total noob question. How does one start to analyze the structure of a song? I have in mind "Telegraph Road" by Knopfler, two totally different moods in the song, as reflected in one lead sounding sort of majorish and the other a minor vibe. Knopfler does not play fast but seems to be good at communicating a vibe. Seems to know how to place notes. That is the real issue.

Form occurs at many levels but basic overall form is really dictated by how musical material is treated throughout the duration of a musical work.

For instance, a basic structure for most rock songs is
Introduction
Verse 1
Chorus
Verse 2
Chorus
Bridge
Chorus

You can usually distinguish the repeated parts because the musical material repeats.
If it repeats exactly the same way you would say a song with the form stated previously follows an ABABCB pattern where (A) contains the same melody and chord progression every time it occurs, (B) has an alternate melody and harmony but it is also stated the same time every time and (C) has yet again more new music but is only stated once.

Beyond melody and harmony, changes in timbre can also mark formal divisions. So playing with clean tone vs distortion can be a formally important change as well.

While verses and choruses are the large scale formal elements of rock music, one can zoom in and examine the form within 'A', 'B', and 'C'.

1) One can look at the length of each division. The number of measures in each is important, for instance. Most rock music is in common time or 4/4 but some tunes can be in 6/8 or even complex metres such as in the case of some prog rock, jazz, fusion, or even other styles. (Master of Puppets has a few odd metre changes)

2) One can look at phrase. Basically, what is the form of melody. If a melody is two part, three part, or four part. If it is continuous or segmented. Usually, important end points in a melody are marked by a rhythmic accent whether that be a long held note or a rest / pause. Sections of a melody can be repeated or it can be through composed. No matter what the form, you will probably notice that there are certain small musical ideas that repeat often throughout the duration of a piece. You will also notice that in a chorus of a radio song, there is often a single idea--consisting of four or five pitches--that is repeated throughout the length of the chorus. This is called a hook and is used so that any listener will be able to instantly recognize the piece. Call it a selling feature.

3) The contour and interval content of melodic material can also be examined. Looking at if the melodic motion is stepwise (Major or minor second) or if it is by leap. (Minor third and larger) Furthermore the relationship of pitches throughout the length of a musical phrase can be examined, specifically by examining the rise and fall relative to the starting and ending note. When crafting a melody, a good sense of rise and fall as well as a good mix of stepwise motion and leaps is integral to creating interest and direction.

4) One can even examine counterpoint. For songwriting, I would encourage this. Look at the relationship between the melody and chord tones at each change on the downbeat and continuing onward from there. You will find that the melody is usually either the interval of a fifth or a third above the chord root and it either rises or falls.

5) The rhythmical content of the melody can be examined. Are there repeating rhythmical ideas? Are the rhythms through composed?

6) The instrumental parts can also be examined. Where do the chord changes happen? Are they cyclical or through composed? Is the melody written over chords or does the melody dictate the harmony? What is the quality of the chords being used? Are they major or minor? Are they using triad extensions such as 7ths, 9th, 11ths, etc? Is the piece not based off of triads but using some other organizational principle? In addition to vertical harmony, one can also look at horizontal harmony i.e. which scales and modes are being used for creating all the musical material in the piece. Is it pentatonic? Natural minor? Major? Modal?

Well, I think I probably raised more questions than I answered but I think this is the basics here. Sorry to my fellow university students for avoiding the proper terminology as much as possible but I'm trying to make this as simple as possible. Not everyone knows the field specific terminology and it isn't unfair to shut these people out just because they have never heard these words before.
 
Knowlegde is power!

I have always been a big beliver in that. However as for my music skills its nothing that is used much. I find that the no rules to guitar playing is more to my liking. I do know the basics of what the tones are called and where to find them on the guitar neck in most cases but no I play and that's that!

It worked for most of the classic rock bands today anyway.
 
Friedmett said:
Knowlegde is power!

I have always been a big beliver in that. However as for my music skills its nothing that is used much. I find that the no rules to guitar playing is more to my liking. I do know the basics of what the tones are called and where to find them on the guitar neck in most cases but no I play and that's that!

It worked for most of the classic rock bands today anyway.

I disagree about 'no rules'. People have to stop thinking about theory as 'rules' and start thinking about it as 'grammar'. (I blame Canada Conservatory for this at least in Canada) I think it is always more beneficial to know WHY something sounds the way it does and to understand WHAT you are doing musically. I know the danger with the Western approach to education is that we get far too hung up on 'right' and 'wrong' answers when artistically, it makes much more sense to check our 'baggage' and try whatever we want. Furthermore, it pays to understand the organizational principles behind many kinds of music since this allows the erudite musician to draw upon these tools while playing music. There is a reason most of the classic rock bands used I V iv and V with ionian or pentatonic melodies in their songs even though they were not following 'the rules'. Their musical language is small because they never bothered to expand it.

In my opinion, the best way to really get beyond our musical lexicon and explore sound more thoroughly is to improvise experimentally. Work within a style where anything truly goes and build the ear. It also helps to listen to many different styles of music.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top