Any /mu/ fag's into music theory?
all u need 2 know is I -> V
and maybe throw some other chords in there if u think it would sound cool desu
>>66073912
These guys >>66027921
and these guys >>66021956
Everyone else is "theory limits muh creativity" plebs whose favorite artist is kanye west
>>66073929
you're obviously a guitarist
>>66073929
Nigger. I play bass. I play in the chord.
>>66073943
Only thing that limits your creativity is your ability to be creative.
Theory is for cucks. Get a piano and improvise until you get it.
>>66074056
and how's that going for you?
>>66073943
>Everyone else is "theory limits muh creativity" plebs whose favorite artist is kanye west
This. Played with tons of musicians. Everyone who plays by ear plays I-IV-V or ii-V-I almost exclusively... maybe with a substitution or modulation here or there. Boring as fuck.
I took a class on basics but didn't take it as serious as I should
I'd love to learn theory but I don't feel like learning any instrument
>>66073943
I hate the "theory limits creativity" argument too
I'm in the visual arts field but it's pretty much the same thing
>>66074127
All you've got to do to learn an instrument is find a pattern. Then the it just flows from there. I play percussion, bass, guitar and for whatever reason flute. I applied everything I knew to learn guitar and bass from playing keyboard percussion. For flute I just looked at a chart for note fingerings.
>>66073912
I've dabbled in it but I feel like I'm just reading aimlessly
I found a really good resource in the sticky but then the site went down days after I found it so I never got to make good use of it
>>66073912
none of this is even remotely complex, how do people struggle with this on a music board?
>>66074127
you dont have to learn an instrument to learn theory. Just go to musictheory.net and work through the lessons. easy as fuck
>>66074200
it helps to, you know, have an instrument to apply them to
>>66074162
You just gotta practice religiously like me until you get unbelievably comfortable with what you're playing. When you're comfortable with the instrument you're playing you're practically unstoppable with it.
>>66074216
You could sing but.. choral music is kinda.. gay.
I'm a music ed major so yeah. Shit's easy and I don't understand how people don't at least understand theory fundamentals
>>66074216
not if you're a musicologist. Even composers dont really have to know an instrument to be able to write. It helps for improvisation to generate ideas, but its not integral to the process.
anon said he didn't want to learn an instrument, I said he doesn't have to to learn theory.
>>66074251
voice is still an instrument, and choral music is much less "gay" than most popular music.
>>66074260
I have a couple friends studying for that as well. What age group do you plan on teaching?
>>66074260
to be fair, all the online shit is worthless, makes it so much more complex than it needs to be teaching useless stuff. Just learn an instrument and get a teacher, best way to do it.
>>66074282
I'm just not into purely choral music.
>>66074304
Learning an instrument doesn't really teach you jack about theory. Maybe basic scales and chords if you learn piano.
The best way to learn theory is to study music at university / college.
>>66074282
Meh, I said it "helps" to play an instruments. Most great composers knew a little piano...
even some like Wagner, who is often cited as a great composer who couldn't play an instrument, could play piano and violin. Not at a concert level, but he did alright
>>66074332
If you wanna get fucked in this ass with music theory then just join a jazz band..
>>66074230
my discipline is awful so I often lose the urge to keep practicing and reading theory
>>66074286
I'm planning on doing at least high school but I really want to go to grad school and teach college level. Younger kids aren't into it as much and its frustrating for me
>>66074304
This is mostly true. I also think learning piano gives you a huge boost
This guy has a bunch of stuff online though that's really helpful albeit a bit juvenile in its presentation http://tobyrush.com/theorypages/
>>66074332
depends on how you learn it...
jazz isn't that complicated... not nearly as tough as studying classical theory at an advanced level. Jazz is a lot more pragmatic though.
>>66074359
Hey that's you man. The best way to learn to play an instrument is to enjoy playing that instrument.
>>66074343
you said "it helps to have an instrument to apply them to" which isn't correct. Theory is most useful to composers and musicologists. Musicologists dont even touch instruments, and composers in this day and age dont even need an instrument to write. The computer and notation software gives you everything you need to write. With the study of orchestration you can easily write for any instrument even if you dont know how to play it.
Instruments are only really necessary for improvising to generate ideas, or to double check if something is "playable" if you have a poor grasp of orchestration.
Performers dont really need theory. they either play whats on the page in front of them, or use their ears to work out what sounds good if they're improvising. Most bands can easily create songs in rehearsal without using theory beyond basic chords and scales.
>>66074332
>Maybe basic scales and chords if you learn piano.
what the fuck do you think music theory is? No one who isn't a professional classical / jazz musician needs to know anything other than the basics about music theory to be adequately knowledgeable about music.
>>66074351
Also this, if you want to know shit fast without paying a fuck ton of money and wasting lots of time, join your schools jazz band. It'll basically teach you first year college theory on it's own, and it'll be a lot more fun.
>>66074380
I mainly play bass but I've tried playing drum kit music for jazz but.. the rhythm is suicidal depending on the score.
>>66074389
I am in my school's Jazz band. I played auxiliary percussion, then rhythm guitar and now bass.
I'm musically illiterate, and though I don't think I'll ever learn an instrument at this point in my life, I think it would be useful to at least have some of the vocabulary of music theory. I have friends who make music, and I find it very hard to talk to them about it because I don't know the words to describe what I am hearing.
>>66074332
>The best way to learn theory is to study music at university / college.
I've heard this before but I can't imagine devoting so much time and money to learning music theory. Maybe if I was still 18-20 I'd do it but I feel a lot of pressure to focus on something financially viable because I'm in my mid 20s.
>>66074351
>If you wanna get fucked in this ass with music theory
Thats literally the only reason you would go study it at university. If you dont want that, just stay pleb and forget about music theory.
Contrary to what you guys think, jazz and classical are quite different strains and have very different approaches. Both will teach you a different form of theory. Jazz will teach you pitch axis and advanced mode usage, Classical will teach you counterpoint and orchestration. It depends which you want to specialize on.
>>66074434
>I played auxiliary percussion, then rhythm guitar and now bass.
wow, you managed to actually managed to play all the instruments that use as little music theory as possible. Congrats i guess.
>>66074434
as someone who never played anything, percussion sounds hella hard
I can't keep up with tempos
>>66074465
if you think you need to be at academic level to appreciate art you failed at everything
ESPECIALLY if you're only talking about theory and not context
>>66074445
>I can't imagine devoting so much time and money to learning music theory
Its really only for those that want to get serious. I went and studied at age 24, after I decided I wanted to learn how to write for orchestra so I could do film soundtracks, etc.
Second year of university managed to have a piece recorded by our national orchestra so seemed to work pretty well. I also get occasional film soundtrack work, so that part seemed to work as well. To make it full time I would pretty much have to start my own business as a composer and spend a lot of time promoting myself / sending out showreels / etc.
>>66074474
What do you play?
>>66074389
>what the fuck do you think music theory is? No one who isn't a professional classical / jazz musician needs to know anything other than the basics about music theory to be adequately knowledgeable about music.
idk harmony and voice leading are kinda useful
>>66074493
Hard on drumkit for me. Probably not for people who mainly play that tho. I'm mainly into keyboard instruments and guitar.
>>66074520
piano, been playing since I'm 10, still shit because I spent all my time improvising instead of practicing. Taught me some advanced composition techniques completely by accident, but I can't play technical stuff for shit, lol.
>>66074544
for discussing music adequately on /mu/, you don't need it.
>>66074561
I like to play really difficult shit because
1. Really helps me to improve
2. It's really fucking fun to play when you can play it.
>>66074504
Yeah I don't want to go that far I'd just like to expand my knowledge in a formal setting.
>>66074608
I actually have playing arranged pieces, it's why I was in the jazz band in high school. I didn't make it into the college jazz band and that fucked me and I ended up majoring in other shit. I like classical music, but fucking learning classical pieces, it's so boring.
>>66074388
Nope.
I'm a semi-professional bassist. I'll find myself in situations where I'll be given a chord chart or a piece of sheet music and I'm expected to play it live, in front of a paid audience, for the first time, having never seen the chart or heard the song before. And I have to do it perfectly.
I see the chords, see the melody written out, etc. I can break it all down quickly in my head and figure out a bassline on the fly. I can break the chords down into modes, turn the modes into arpeggios, connect the arpeggios with the rhythm and turn those arpeggios into music. And I can do this instantaneously because I really know my music theory. To the point where it's intuitive.
The reason you think theory isn't useful for performers, is you're not good enough at it.
>>66074561
>for discussing music adequately on /mu/, you don't need it.
For discussing music adequately on /mu/, you don't even need to have heard music before. Just say "it's shit" and try to make the people who disagree feel insecure.
>>66074651
Yeah, I know how you feel when learning classical pieces. For me when playing jazz music gives more anticipation to be able to play it for how fun it is. For me classical music is fun and beautiful but not as energetic and rhythmically fun to play as jazz.
>>66074682
>for discussing music in a way that isn't complete fucking cancer on /mu/, you don't need it.
better?
>>66074707
I just like creating stuff, hate having to play stuff that i can't influence.
>>66074672
Damn. I wish I was at your level but I can't play bass as much as want to in high school band because of being stuck in percussion. I enjoy it but it's not what I want to play professionally.
>>66074740
If you are stuck in percussion in a high school band, you're not playing anything professionally, sorry senpai.
>>66074723
I want to make my own stuff but I've never really tried. I mainly just practice improving key signatures with on keyboard or bass.
>>66074779
Yeah, I know but my main focus for when I get out like a year from now is mainly jazz studies in college. I'm just trying to get as good as I can before I hit college.
Why is musical notation so convoluted? It seems like it would be difficult to even figure out what a piece of written music is supposed to sound like.
I felt the same way about Leibniz notation in calculus (like dy/dx stuff) until I learned about differential equations, when I said "oh, well if you're going to do that, then writing it this way makes perfect sense."
Is something similar going on with musical notation?
>>66074723
>discussing music in a way that isn't complete fucking cancer on /mu/
Good one
>>66074740
Percussion is the most important part though. Whatever instrument you play, having a song, internalized sense of rhythm is the number one thing that will take you far in music.
If you're stuck playing percussion, fine. Be the best fucking percussionist you can be. Learn everything you can about it. And when you go back to bass, use what you learned playing percussion.
I'm not even a great bass player, but I have that strong sense of rhythm and that's what sets me apart, I think. I got from playing drums in high school and middle school band too.
>>66074819
What makes you think music notation is convoluted? It looks perfectly fine to me.
Also any mathematician would argue that Leibniz notation is convoluted. Separation of variables is not technically correct but it leads to the right answer.
>>66074819
> It seems like it would be difficult to even figure out what a piece of written music is supposed to sound like.
unless you have 100% perfect pitch, it actually isn't possible. I mean you can get a feel for how it'll sound by knowing the key and seeing the general slope of the notes, but very few people can actually read sheet music like a book.
>>66074830
are you implying that discussing music somewhat intelligently is cancer?
>>66074819
Because it was created for and by singers.Tab actually came first (from Spanish lute players).
I feel the same way about Leibniz calculus too... if only they taught Newtonian or LaGrangian calculus first...
>>66074848
>having a song,
should be "having a strong..." sorry, it's late
>>66074848
I never really thought of it that way. That actually helps a lot.
>>66074849
>What makes you think...
Why are some notes "closer together" (like E and F on a piano I guess; I am musically illiterate) in some scales, yet spaced identically along the "axis" of the sheet music? From reading I have the sense that there are other aspects of the system that abstract the written form from the sound of the music, but I don't think I have the vocabulary (even with the helpful OP image) to ask specific questions about them.
>>66074855
>you can get a feel for how it'll sound by knowing the key and seeing the general slope of the notes, but very few people can actually read sheet music like a book.
This is what I was wondering about. Why even write it that way, then? It seems to me like "classical music" is mostly defined as "music in the written tradition." Musical notation "in the written tradition" does not correspond directly to sound, so is there something else about writing with notes and clefs and measures that was advantageous for the composers who historically relied on it? Does it enforce a good song structure, or something?
>>66074863
>Because it was created for and by singers.
Why is it good for singers? Do the limits of voice as an instrument explain the origins of some of the really arbitrary-seeming stuff?
>Tab actually came first
I don't tabs either, but would it be accurate to say that it is more like "instructions" or a "recipe," while musical notation is more like a written description of a song?
>if only they taught Newtonian or LaGrangian calculus first...
Newtonian notation is still popular in some introductory physics courses, at least. Physics is the impetus for a lot of people to learn calculus anyway. It's a shame that notation gets in the for some people.
>>66075016
I see where you're getting at. E and F are what's called a half-step apart versus F and G which are a whole-step (two half-steps) apart. Also what might confuse you is that you can write the same note in several different ways.
C is the same as B# which is the same as Db and you can get some insanely weird stuff like F* (double sharp), also known as G and Abb (double flat). The purpose of this at least is that (((in general))) if you see an accidental on the page (not in the key signature) it signifies "hey! the music is leading somewhere right now!" The best I can describe this is with an example. Play a C major scale C-D-E-F-G-A-B but stop there. You really, really want to play another C after B because in C major, B is what's called the leading tone because it's a half-step below C and wants to get there. In general a sharped note wants to resolve up a half-step and a flatted note wants to resolve down a half-step. Double sharped notes are just sharped notes in ridiculous keys and function the same. Don't ask me about double flats you almost never see them and I'm tired.
Sorry if any of this is confusing I kinda threw a bunch at you and idk if anything made sense its 3 am im going to bed
I'm surprised this thread wasn't cancer. This actually taught me a little bit.
>>66075016
>would it be accurate to say that it is more like "instructions" or a "recipe," while musical notation is more like a written description of a song?
no. The only thing missing from tabs is the rhythm, and with modern tabs the rhythm is supplied too. Early notation lacked rhythm too and was more just the notes scribbled above the words so the singers could remember how the tune went.
>>66075181
But what? C# is the same as Db. Not B#.
>>66075209
Fuck me I'm tired.
C = B# = Dbb
C# = Db
>>66075229
Me too. I'm just seeing how much longer this thread is gonna last then I'm going to bed.
>>66075229
But to explain half-step and whole-step for people who don't know it'd be better just to post a picture of keys on a piano or something and indicate half-step or whole-step.
>>66075181
Thanks! This was actually very interesting. It sounds like the notation can help point out important "sensations" in a piece. It all seems a little accidental though.
