RE: Music Theory: Why? (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - General: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=13
- - - RE: Music Theory: Why?: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=56216



Message


JohnWalshGuitar -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:16:58)

I should have prefaced that comment by saying 'apart from Juan'
Juan is an upload machine! Ole tu Juan!




Sr. Martins -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:22:02)

quote:

It is odd to me that much of the criticism is coming from a luthier, a soloist, and an older gentleman who admittedly knows nothing and has little experience.


That's exactly what I don't understand. Why get defensive and start attacking others to make your point (or absence of it)?


It's clear that you can play flamenco without musical knowledge and that's fine if that's all you want to do in your musical journey. Everyone else is just saying that there's more to music than grabbing a guitar and choosing por medio/arriba or "were will I put the capo this time?".




Sr. Martins -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:26:01)

quote:

'"Music theory" doesnt provide actual music or musical ideas.
It is simply the alphabet to the language of music.
It is not music itself.'


This is also very funny, with the video and someone to back it up...

If it wasn't for the fact that it isn't true at all, then it would be even nicer [:D]


edit: Unless we forget a big chunk of music that was written since the last century.




guitarbuddha -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:30:16)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sr. Martins

quote:

'"Music theory" doesnt provide actual music or musical ideas.
It is simply the alphabet to the language of music.
It is not music itself.'


This is also very funny, with the video and someone to back it up...

If it wasn't for the fact that it isn't true at all, then it would be even nicer [:D]


That's a quote from Todd by the way.

I thought Bill Withers did indeed use a simple theoretical idea as the sole musical material for the section I pointed out. And I would guess that it began life as a technical exercise, like a lot of music does.

D.




SephardRick -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:33:18)

quote:

sole musical


Typo? I was thinking "soul".




guitarbuddha -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:35:13)

Soul, what does that mean ?

I must consult my textbooks.[:D]

D[:)]




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:43:45)

From posts in the past it is obvious Todd is not against music theory. He was illustrating a point related to it. No amount of knowledge (and as far as I’m concerned-- or practice) can make you a great player if you don't have something to say musically, if you don't have a musical vision. Also, I make the distinction between an academician's and a player's pursuit of theory. On some level if you can't apply it you don't know it.




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:46:27)

quote:

But I am sure that 70 shows a year for 5 years (continued performance over 15), playing for classes three days a week for 5 years, studying with two masters, and doing graduate work, is more flamenco (and academic) experience than


Then why don't you upload something...




BarkellWH -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:47:03)

quote:

It is odd to me that much of the criticism is coming from a luthier, a soloist, and an older gentleman who admittedly knows nothing and has little experience.


I assume that your phrase, "older gentleman who knows nothing and has little experience," refers to me, in which case I would appreciate a more precise description taken from my post. My "full disclosure" statement reads, "In the spirit of full disclosure, I know little of music theory, and my playing ability leaves much to be desired." You have taken my honest statement and twisted it to read, "admittedly knows nothing and has little experience."

While I may be deficient in my knowledge of music theory, and my playing ability and talent may not reach the level of many Foro members, you have no idea what my level of knowledge and experience is, thus rendering your statement, quoted above, pure speculation on your part without foundation.

Bill




guitarbuddha -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:47:05)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pgh_flamenco


Then why don't you upload something...


Hostility ?

This is turning into a mean spirited rout . Kevin uploaded plenty in the past and I believe there is room for him here and he should be made welcome.

D.




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:51:43)

quote:

Hostility ?


No, none whatsoever.




guitarbuddha -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:53:17)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pgh_flamenco

quote:

Hostility ?


No, none whatsoever.


Think of the cumulative effect. Noone in particular is doing anything too untoward (except me of course but that's what is expected from weirdos) but he is not being made very welcome.

D.




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 17:58:40)

quote:

Think of the cumulative effect. Noone in particular is doing anything too untoward (except me of course but that's what is expected from weirdos) but he is not being made very welcome.

D.


He's been a member here longer then me and used to engage in high-level discussions about flamenco. I enjoyed reading the posts he made under his former username, but they were all deleted years ago. By his own admission he has a lot of experience as a player. Why not share it here?




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 18:25:01)

quote:

2- Can somebody with no talent be able to (if he has a firm grasp of theory) "scientifically" compose (by knowing what chords fit with what scales, etc.) something that will generally be accepted as "nice-sounding?"


Well Ramzi, to answer this aspect of the question you posted in 2007 (yes, it was almost eight years ago to the day!): I think it would be unlikely that a scientific approach would be useful in this regard. Theory, in my opinion, and in this instance only, as it relates to how it is applied by a player performing with a musical instrument, has more to do with ear training than anything else. It definitely built my confidence as a player in this regard.




Sr. Martins -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 18:32:31)

quote:

Well Ramzi, to answer this aspect of the question you posted in 2007 (yes, it was almost eight years ago to the day!): I think it would be unlikely that a scientific approach would be useful in this regard. Theory, in my opinion, and in this instance only, as it relates to how it is applied by a player performing with a musical instrument, has more to do with ear training than anything else. It definitely built my confidence as a player in this regard.


I don't know why people keep spreading dogmas like this one... There's plenty of evidence on music which is built only on theory. You can surely compose perfectly nice sounding music without even knowing how it will sound while writing it down.




Leñador -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 18:53:28)

This topic is interesting but this thread makes me want to jab chopsticks into my eyes. [:D] lol




koenie17 -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 19:01:17)

For good flamenco music theory isnt nesecary...

But knowing never hurts...




guitarbuddha -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 19:37:34)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sr. Martins

There's plenty of evidence on music which is built only on theory. You can surely compose perfectly nice sounding music without even knowing how it will sound while writing it down.


That's absolutely true and displays both the pros and con's of a given approach. You can produce perfectly good sounding four part harmony over a given melody without having more than the vaguest idea of how it sounds if you have a strong enough grasp of the rules. Kids do it in Grade theory exams and conservatoires every day. I was one of them. And it can sound great (given that the principle melody was already worthwhile) and a choir would be able to sight sing it without difficulty and it will sound beautiful (or you fail the exam).

Then I had to go back and do it over all again to make it work on the guitar and be able to find things on the hoof and know how they would sound in advance. Now bad harmony just jumps right out at me.

Some people go the other way and learn to harmonise on the fly, in jam sessions and at gigs. This way has a lot of advantages for a first step. But even then a lot of these more street wise guys eventually work through a harmony manual or two and use this information to refine their approach and through it their enjoyment of music.

Courses for horses.

D.


D.




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 20:17:45)

quote:

I don't know why people keep spreading dogmas like this one...


I was hardly being dogmatic and the number of conditions I placed on my statement makes this obvious. The main reason a guitar player should learn music theory is to become a better musician and as such it serves mainly as an aid for ear training. Has anyone on this site learned theory to compose music on paper only or with a computer program? If so who and where are the audio uploads? Out of all the people on this site with degrees who could do it and all the intelligent people who might be motivated to do so to my knowledge no one on the foro ever has.




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 20:20:39)

quote:

Now bad harmony just jumps right out at me.


Yes, because of all the ear training involved in learning theory...




Sr. Martins -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 20:39:16)

I don't know why you keep narrowing it down to "guitar" and "flamenco". Music is much more than that and even the original topic had 4 points, only half of them mentioned flamenco and guitar.


While you don't seem to be interested in attacking those who have knowledge on theory, it's rather unclear what your point is.




Mark2 -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 20:54:47)

I love music theory, studying music, etc. Love to learn new things. I've been playing music a long time and managed to play with some really great players. The greatest of all knew his theory backwards and forwards-he played in many orchestras. But then you have flamenco, and it's pretty clear that most of the greats don't know it formally. That I think will change as we move forward. Kevin I really appreciate your posts as you have a perspective that is different from anyone else here. But so does (G)Todd(that was clever), who happens to be a really great musician. I didn't see anything in what he wrote that was a put down. As for Stephan, he builds great flamenco guitars and knows everyone in the SF flamenco scene, likely because he has supported that scene extensively. Bill is an older guy who has a lot of experience in life so I'm inclined to consider his posts carefully. I read that you are going to spain to study and that is awesome. But given the fact that you have been at it a while, I'm surprised you haven't developed a thicker skin. You seem to really be affected by posts that disagree with your viewpoint, and I'm wondering how you reconcile that trait with the obvious challenges any non Spaniard faces in the flamenco world. In any case, I hope you keep posting, especially when you get to Spain.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kevin

Simple solution.

If you don't like micro breweries, don't go to them. But don't go to a microbrewery and insult the next table, some of the members of which are discussing the difference between Stouts and IPAs. If someone has developed a taste for stouts through experience and your mad because they order and talk about something other than PBR or Old Milwaukee, that's not ****, that is your own hangup.

If JasonMc or Ricardo were around my town I would humble myself and study with either of them. I also really admire John Walsh's playing. As for guitar, one could do worse than studying with Grisha. He's a monster. It is odd to me that much of the criticism is coming from a luthier, a soloist, and an older gentleman who admittedly knows nothing and has little experience.
My corner of flamenco is humble, VERY HUMBLE. But I am sure that 70 shows a year for 5 years (continued performance over 15), playing for classes three days a week for 5 years, studying with two masters, and doing graduate work, is more flamenco (and academic) experience than Bananaboy, Godd, and Barkelworth have.

Sincere intentions of sharing something is anything but solipsistic and need not be erudite.

I also find it sad that many people have not learned that "we just don't have the emoticons to express" things the ways we sometimes want. Add to that the fact that you never know what is going on in somebody's life and these attacks/criticisms are deplorable.

So sad.




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 21:01:53)

quote:

I don't know why you keep narrowing it down to "guitar" and "flamenco". Music is much more than that and even the original topic had 4 points, only half of them mentioned flamenco and guitar.


While you don't seem to be interested in attacking those who have knowledge on theory, it's rather unclear what your point is.


This is a topical forum dedicated, for the most part, to members devoted to learning flamenco guitar. I'm only trying to point out what a person might need to know from a practical perspective about the role music theory plays in becoming a better guitarist. I consider my responses within the contexts of the foro and Ramzi's questions relevant and reasonable.




Sr. Martins -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 21:13:05)

quote:

I consider my responses within the contexts of the foro and Ramzi's questions relevant and reasonable.


You do? Maybe you "did"... if you still "do" then I believe this conversation serves no one's purpose atm.




Pgh_flamenco -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 30 2015 21:16:36)

quote:

You do? Maybe you "did"... if you still "do" then I believe this conversation serves no one's purpose atm.


Care to elaborate?




estebanana -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 31 2015 1:22:49)

This cracks me up that you guys are so hot under the collar about theory.

Really what flamenco guitar is, is accompanying song forms that don't really need to be over theorized. You can accompany Alegrias all day and night with four to six chords, a couple inversions, and two or three good falsetas.

Flamenco at the core is just that. What makes it good is the way the player senses and knows from deep listening where to play which of the four or five chords in Alegrias.

Then a guitarist needs two, maybe four kinds of rasgeuado, some alza pua, a couple of closes for dancers, an extra two or three kinds of remate' to change it up. Add a Silencio you can play with your thumb, and casteana section, and the skill of changing speed fluently as a dancer speeds up, some ways of marking time, and couple of special fasetas for foot work sections....a buleria de cadiz form...a big close in the end..

You don't even need picado, and you don't need theory. You just need four or five chords, and a lot of listening to know where to put a few well learned techniques.

Most people that talk about endlessly about theory can't accompany for beans.

This is like putting Decarte' before Decaballo.


Learn to accompany some and then add theory to your bag. I'd rather hear people who know how to listen and play flamenco in a very solid basic way than hear talk of harmonic analysis ect. You can do that, but you don't need to.

That said, knowing the musical structure and how it works is not a bad thing, but even the guitar players I know who are geniuses at theoretical analysis would rather a student put more importance on careful listening than advanced analysis.
How many times have I gone to a guitar teachers house and heard them say: The students need to listen more, not know more. ?? Many times.




Sr. Martins -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 31 2015 1:44:06)

So... you just read the thread title and assumed all that by the number of posts, right? Looks like it.. [:D]


I guess no one can place broader questions on this forum, half of the people here will cut down the original question in favor of the "flamenco answers" they have readily available.


Anyways, it seems to be the same in all other forums.

1: Would music theory help me in some way?
2: "Someguywhosellsmanyrecords" doesn't know any so unless you wanna be a smartass, you're fine without it.
1: Thanks alot man!! Let me spread that valuable info all over the place!




estebanana -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 31 2015 1:45:17)

I feel the haters reloading to shoot,

Fire when ready Gridley!

Attacca! Get into the Piano Forte, Fortissimo, man the Cannons!

Segue to the bridge! Blow up the species counter point, jamb them in the retrograde inversion!

Slonimsky them to death, Cut off their Schoenbergs, send them to the Hanging Gardens!

Petrushka Chord them until they fall over!




Sr. Martins -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 31 2015 1:52:36)

I never understood the need that people have to come throw their feces at what they supposedly don't care about.


If theory is just crap to you, do you feel you've added anything insightful to the debate?


It would make sense if the topic was about "Is theory needed to play flamenco?"... but it isn't.




estebanana -> RE: Music Theory: Why? (Jan. 31 2015 1:54:40)

quote:

So... you just read the thread title and assumed all that by the number of posts, right? Looks like it..


I read the whole thing in 2007, and I have been thinking. Then i read the recent add-onns and thought you guys have lost your marbles.

Jason, Todd, Ricardo, some times Grisha several others have given a lot of theoretical discussion. There is no lack of teachers to give good FREE theory explanations. What is the big deal?

My personal opinion is that to be a Flamenco player you get rated by how well you accompany and that does not have a lot to do with theory really. If you can't accompany you're not a complete flamenco player yet, in my opinion. Solo playing is just icing on the cake.

Accompaniment is the heart and soul of flamenco playing. Where a guitar player throws in little pinches here and there to help a singer or dancer is the art, if we don't have that leave the guitar in the guitar case.

I'd rather hear a guitar player do excellent palmas than play a half assed solo.

How many of you can do competent palmas that a pro dancer would approve of? Not many I wager, and that is way more important than music theory. But the problem is that most people don't get that palmas before guitar is a priority, they want to be a star, not real a flamenco who can sing, play palmas and dance a bit.




Page: <<   <   2 3 [4] 5 6    >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET