What you say and what you do!

GuitaRoland · #1 11-08-2010, 01:49 PM

What you say and what you do!

Some people at this forum seem to have a lot so say theoretically but you never hear what they do musically - do they ever play music?!

What is the meaning of music? To play it or to be a master of the theoretical side of the this beautiful art form?

I have lost interest in this forum after watching and following some of the most frequent masters of this great forum. Why are we here - it seems that some of us that don't have the perfect theoretically knowledge of things - we don't belong here at all. Some of you guys even make fun of us. Do you enjoy it?

I'll stick to playing the music from now on!

/Roland

mr. beaumont · #2 11-08-2010, 03:33 PM

Wow, I don't know what you're referring to, but that sucks, and I hope you'll reconsider..

I'm not a fan of the "put up or shut up" stuff, though. I think you can tell a lot about what a person knows by how they conduct themselves in conversation, and I think as a whole this is a pretty well-behaved corner of the internet. There's some "blowhards" everywhere--gotta have thick skin sometimes and learn to ignore 'em. My two cents, anyway.

And just for the record, I have posted plenty of music here, but I don't think that makes my comments any more valid than someone who hasn't.

docbop · #3 11-08-2010, 03:59 PM

No matter how you study its all about sitting down and putting it to use, getting it under your fingers. Theory is about learning the language of music it doesn't teach you how to play.

Theory forum can get to be like politics there is traditional, Jazz and various school of thought within each of them. Some can get cult-like in their support of the school of thought they believe in. I used to let those people upset me, I try to ignore them life is too short and I rather practice than argue over labels.

So hope you don't give up on theory it can save you time, help to communicate with other musicians, and be a source of things to experiment with.

backliner · #4 11-08-2010, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuitaRoland

...Why are we here - it seems that some of us that don't have the perfect theoretically knowledge of things - we don't belong here at all. Some of you guys even make fun of us...

I'm kind of new here and have noticed that there are some posters who know each other and banter back and forth (mostly humorously but sometimes there's irritation).

Certainly there are theory dominant types who take the genre very seriously, and try to convey that as important when apprehending this music.
But I don't see much "making fun," even if a response may have a barb to it. MOST of the more experienced posters seem interested in sharing knowledge that has perhaps helped them, or even recommended examples or websites where more information might be found.

Depending on the day, I may find this forum illuminating, light weight, or hopelessly left-brained.

But I keep at it in my ignorance and imperfections because there are some serious holes in my "comprehensive comprehension" of jazz theory, and find this forum to be a good clearinghouse of information, despite the spammers, prickly posts, and sneaking suspicion that there may be a better site somewhere.

Where? Would be my question.

Musicians being non-conformists usually, can be dysfunctional socially, but I don't see that here more than anywhere else on the worldwide web.

randalljazz · #5 11-08-2010, 04:49 PM

gee, if i could actually play music i probably wouldn't spend much time messing aroung online...

Jake Hanlon · #6 11-08-2010, 05:01 PM

i don't like talking about theory tbh. It seems rather mechanical.

But, it's important to know.

I'd rather hear someone play something that sounds great they cannot explain them having someone try to explain something to me they cannot hear.

Reg · #7 11-08-2010, 07:31 PM

Hey Guitar Roland... don't take anything from this forum personal, we don't know you except from what you say or play... I have posted some samples and will continue to do when I think it will help, or if someone needs help on a tune or technique... I play professionally and am a little embarrassed to post my playing... If I've made comments that pushed you the wrong way... sorry... All I'm trying to do is make guitar player better... Raise their level of musicianship... they tend to get made fun of because of our lack of musicianship in general... I take great pride in my level of musicianship and understanding of traditional music and my specialized understanding of jazz theory and harmony... I've spent 40 years studying, teaching and playing music. If your talking about it... you may not have made up your mind as to what your doing... Nobody on this forum gets paid to hang... we all want you to play the best you can and enjoy the process... hang in there... this forum's the best deal on the web... Best Reg

fumblefingers · #8 11-08-2010, 07:45 PM

the point of music is to listen, play, compose, etc.

you don't need any theory for the first, but it can help you with your appreciation.

you need some theory for the second.

you need more for the third. maybe much more.

billkath · #9 11-08-2010, 08:38 PM

I'd disagree with you there, FF. What I disagree with is the word "Need". "Helpful"?-Yes. "Need"?-No.

Music of the last 50 years-music that actually sold, and been listened too by the majority of people, I mean, has largely been written and performed by people with little or no classical theory.
I've found that there IS a certain-snobbishness? in certain jazz circles, and with certain jazz players. Kind of like it's a secret club, and you have to know all this secret stuff to play it. We all know here that that's rubbish. There's no more a secret to playing jazz than playing any other genre of music. It's just that, by listening to a lot of jazz cats-you'd think it was true.

Now-theory certainly helps you-no doubt about it. I felt it very important to learn theory, at least more than I already knew. But-that was because I felt some theory would help me in all the genres I play-not just jazz. And it has. Has it made me a better guitarist? Well-lots of people thought I was fairly hot, anyway, before I learned any of this stuff- I don't know that I'm any "better". The big question, though, is "Am I a Better MUSICIAN?" And to that-I'd have to say "Absolutely". Much better.

Why? Because I'm not intimidated by someone saying "Up a 5th on the last Chorus" or "3 flats" when you ask what key, or "play a mixolydian over that bit". Now-on a rock and roll band, people are saying the same things-just using a different type of musical language to describe those same things--"Last chorus goes up to A", "It's in Eb" or "Give a 7th feel to that bit".

This is where I feel the snobbishness is. Not that it's snobbish to say "Play a mixolydian". Just that it's might be about where, when and to whom one says it-context. It's language to musicians with theory. It's jargon to musicians, who might be just as talanted at playing, but who have little theory. It sounds intimidating. And thus,perceived as threatening.

Kind of like when I go out with my wife and her friends and they start with this office speak. "Incentivise"."Strategic Staircase". Blah, blah, blah. They know what they mean. And it's fine in the office. But saying those things to me will only end up with me spitting in their drink when they go to the toilet.

.

It's all about communication. Being able to communicate at a level or using words that the person who asked the question can understand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fumblefingers

the point of music is to listen, play, compose, etc.

you don't need any theory for the first, but it can help you with your appreciation.

you need some theory for the second.

you need more for the third. maybe much more.

timscarey · #10 11-08-2010, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuitaRoland

What you say and what you do!

Some people at this forum seem to have a lot so say theoretically but you never hear what they do musically - do they ever play music?!

What is the meaning of music? To play it or to be a master of the theoretical side of the this beautiful art form?

I have lost interest in this forum after watching and following some of the most frequent masters of this great forum. Why are we here - it seems that some of us that don't have the perfect theoretically knowledge of things - we don't belong here at all. Some of you guys even make fun of us. Do you enjoy it?

I'll stick to playing the music from now on!

/Roland

Huh. I actually find this forum to be the ONLY one I've ever posted on where I DON'T get treated like an idiot (most of the time)

I really dig this group of guys (and the few ladies) I've learned a lot and had great discussions. I've never really posted much music, especially not jazz guitar, but the discussions tend to be pretty enlightening most of the time.

I hope you were not referring to me as the dickhead, I can be a little blunt sometimes, but never mean to read in a condescending manner.

ksjazzguitar · #11 11-09-2010, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuitaRoland

...What is the meaning of music? To play it or to be a master of the theoretical side of the this beautiful art form?...

What is the problem? Architecture is an art form, but you can't be an architect without studying "theory." Authors read a lot and read literary theory and criticism. Painters study form, old paintings, perspective, geometry, etc.

I always find it ironic. Music, of all the arts, is the most abstract - it least represents something in the physical world. In some ways it is the most complex and scientific. And yet it is the one that people think that they should understand the most instinctively.

If it were a simple art form (making a good burger), then theory would not really be needed. But music is an amazingly complicated system, therefore it requires a theoretical system to understand it. True, you can try to understand it just aurally, but that will take you 30 years.

I've known a few guys who devoted themselves to the "screw theory, I'm just going to play what I hear" camp. I knew them in school ten years ago and they've barely changed at all (their playing that is.) They are still playing the same ideas they did back them. The point of study is to open up your ears to new possibilities. You are still playing "what you hear", but now you "hear" so much more. Miles and Diz used to go down to the library to read though Stravinsky scores - they weren't doing it for kicks, they were using study to open their ears to other possibilities. (Many of the jazz greats did more studying than we realize - even if informally.)

The key is that we need to remember that "theory" is an a posteriori attempt to explain what sounds good. It does not define what sounds good. The theory comes after. If it sounds good, then it is theory's responsibility to come up with an explanation, not the music's job to fit into the theory. If something sounds bad, then it doesn't matter what the theory says. Theory works for the music, not the other way around.

Some people think of theory as some kind of restraint. I think of it as an organizational tool that can help me categorize different sounds and suggest new ones. It isn't knowledge that stifles creativity, it is ignorance.

If you don't want to talk theory, then don't. If you want to try the "screw theory, I'm just going to play what I hear" tack, go ahead. But my experience is that road leads to mediocrity - unless you are willing to wait 30 years for your ears to fully develop on their own.

I agree, sometimes people can get too caught up in memorizing bizarre scales and substitutions. I have spoken many times about how I think people are too obsessed with scales and playing lots of notes. But I still say that theory and analysis can be a wonderful tool. Don't fault us because we want to open up our ears because we want to hear new things. And many of us have provided samples if you want to criticize them for being too "theoretical."

Peace,
Kevin

fumblefingers · #12 11-09-2010, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billkath

I'd disagree with you there, FF. What I disagree with is the word "Need". "Helpful"?-Yes. "Need"?-No.

Music of the last 50 years-music that actually sold, and been listened too by the majority of people, I mean, has largely been written and performed by people with little or no classical theory.
I've found that there IS a certain-snobbishness? in certain jazz circles, and with certain jazz players. Kind of like it's a secret club, and you have to know all this secret stuff to play it. We all know here that that's rubbish. There's no more a secret to playing jazz than playing any other genre of music. It's just that, by listening to a lot of jazz cats-you'd think it was true.

Now-theory certainly helps you-no doubt about it. I felt it very important to learn theory, at least more than I already knew. But-that was because I felt some theory would help me in all the genres I play-not just jazz. And it has. Has it made me a better guitarist? Well-lots of people thought I was fairly hot, anyway, before I learned any of this stuff- I don't know that I'm any "better". The big question, though, is "Am I a Better MUSICIAN?" And to that-I'd have to say "Absolutely". Much better.

Why? Because I'm not intimidated by someone saying "Up a 5th on the last Chorus" or "3 flats" when you ask what key, or "play a mixolydian over that bit". Now-on a rock and roll band, people are saying the same things-just using a different type of musical language to describe those same things--"Last chorus goes up to A", "It's in Eb" or "Give a 7th feel to that bit".

This is where I feel the snobbishness is. Not that it's snobbish to say "Play a mixolydian". Just that it's might be about where, when and to whom one says it-context. It's language to musicians with theory. It's jargon to musicians, who might be just as talanted at playing, but who have little theory. It sounds intimidating. And thus,perceived as threatening.

Kind of like when I go out with my wife and her friends and they start with this office speak. "Incentivise"."Strategic Staircase". Blah, blah, blah. They know what they mean. And it's fine in the office. But saying those things to me will only end up with me spitting in their drink when they go to the toilet.

.

It's all about communication. Being able to communicate at a level or using words that the person who asked the question can understand.

i guess it depends on what you mean by theory. next to knowing nothing, or almost nothing, knowing at least some rudiments of music is to "know a little bit of theory", as far as I am concerned. it may only be pages 1-10 or a portion thereof, but its still theory.

that was my point. i think i set the bar as low as i could in good conscience. but i acknowledege your setting it even lower. whatever works.

randalljazz · #13 11-09-2010, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar

What is the problem? Architecture is an art form, but you can't be an architect without studying "theory." Authors read a lot and read literary theory and criticism. Painters study form, old paintings, perspective, geometry, etc.

I always find it ironic. Music, of all the arts, is the most abstract - it least represents something in the physical world. In some ways it is the most complex and scientific. And yet it is the one that people think that they should understand the most instinctively.

If it were a simple art form (making a good burger), then theory would not really be needed. But music is an amazingly complicated system, therefore it requires a theoretical system to understand it. True, you can try to understand it just aurally, but that will take you 30 years.

I've known a few guys who devoted themselves to the "screw theory, I'm just going to play what I hear" camp. I knew them in school ten years ago and they've barely changed at all (their playing that is.) They are still playing the same ideas they did back them. The point of study is to open up your ears to new possibilities. You are still playing "what you hear", but now you "hear" so much more. Miles and Diz used to go down to the library to read though Stravinsky scores - they weren't doing it for kicks, they were using study to open their ears to other possibilities. (Many of the jazz greats did more studying than we realize - even if informally.)

The key is that we need to remember that "theory" is an a posteriori attempt to explain what sounds good. It does not define what sounds good. The theory comes after. If it sounds good, then it is theory's responsibility to come up with an explanation, not the music's job to fit into the theory. If something sounds bad, then it doesn't matter what the theory says. Theory works for the music, not the other way around.

Some people think of theory as some kind of restraint. I think of it as an organizational tool that can help me categorize different sounds and suggest new ones. It isn't knowledge that stifles creativity, it is ignorance.

If you don't want to talk theory, then don't. If you want to try the "screw theory, I'm just going to play what I hear" tack, go ahead. But my experience is that road leads to mediocrity - unless you are willing to wait 30 years for your ears to fully develop on their own.

I agree, sometimes people can get too caught up in memorizing bizarre scales and substitutions. I have spoken many times about how I think people are too obsessed with scales and playing lots of notes. But I still say that theory and analysis can be a wonderful tool. Don't fault us because we want to open up our ears because we want to hear new things. And many of us have provided samples if you want to criticize them for being too "theoretical."

Peace,
Kevin

eloquent.

Gramps · #14 11-09-2010, 09:58 AM

I'm sorry GuitarRoland feels that way but I've seen very little of the behavior he sees. If you're talking about music, theory is the language to explain it. I think some people think they have to memorize all theory prior to playing while I believe you're better off taking a concept and applying it to everything you can think of, then take another concept and do the same.

I've seen very few jerks on this site and lots of people who genuinely try to help and answer questions. That's why I come back.

ohlcv · #15 11-09-2010, 10:01 AM

ditto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gramps

I've seen very few jerks on this site and lots of people who genuinely try to help and answer questions. That's why I come back.

Reg · #16 11-09-2010, 10:31 AM

I agree with Randall...great post Kevin... I dig all your posts... I don't agree with them all, but always enjoy reading them... (and Guitar Roland, here's an example of someone disagreeing with someone posting but not taking or making it personal)... I do believe there are physical principles that help define what sounds " Good ", If you put a little time in becoming aware of Acoustics of music, you'll become aware that sound has very physical tendencies. Once you decide to use a system of pitch organizations there are very strong tendencies, which are connected to be what we call "sounds Good ". There are current neuroscience studies that go into great detail of how our brain processes music. The most current Abstract is in January's, Journal of Neuroscience, titled... A Generalized Mechanism for Perception of Pitch Patterns, Journal wouldn't let them use word Music, so title was changes to... Pitch Patterns. This abstract makes reference to the majority of previous studies also. I'm not pushing for everyone to become that involved... but a little understanding of musical acoustics goes along way. But after all said... I'm still a working musician and don't worry very much about theory at gigs... just as one of the many skills of musicianship to help my playing.
Hey Kevin I think theory might be more in the direction of, ...why something sounds good, " what sounds good " appears like divine knowledge... monk style... Or not...best Reg

wolflen · #17 11-09-2010, 11:46 AM

reg...i understand your post..(this is a good thing..right..?)

my early music education came from being attracted to educators that would take the music apart to show you how it "worked"...billy taylor had a tv show that explored jazz in this way...why your "ear" likes a certain sound..

when i studied with ted greene..and he started to show me the concepts of the "overtone" series..(the twilight zone of music theory) i grasped it..of course in practice you can only know the workings of this concept is going on without your help..so to speak

but the more advanced music concepts that are used in daily practice...like symmetric harmony...which fascinates me to this day..and i use it often...it will intrigue the ear ..because it can "follow the logic" of the music...
i would spend alot of time exploring these type of dynamics..and for me..the joy of being able to play them with a degree of authority was and still is worth all the effort and time invested in learning the "why" in the endless questions you discover in music...

play well

wolf

kenbennett · #18 11-09-2010, 12:25 PM

Great thread.

Every thing we do requires some knowledge and some experience. Knowledge and experience, theory and practice: they go together.

I agree that it is possible to take theory way beyond what you need to play and talk about music. It is physics after all.

It is also possible to reach a level of experience of music that is so sublime that no theory can explain it. It is art after all.

To think that you can get by with no theory is to deny what theory really is.

Just knowing is song is theory. Can you play a song without knowing it? Yes, but only as a follower, not as a leader. (Ironically, the more theory you know, the better you can play songs without knowing them.)

Learning a song by ear involves theory. Somehow you are able to identify the notes in the melody and the chords in the harmony. Intellectually you are discerning intervals, even though you may not be able to name them, and you are playing more than two notes at a time perhaps without being able to name the chord (Even knowing that it is called a chord is theory).

I say theory and practice go together.

I have described how theory creeps into practice. Practice also creeps into theory.

When you study theory, the only way to express it is through some sort of practice. Either you write it down in words, sing it, play it, diagram it in pictures, or write it out in tab or notation.

Having said that knowledge and experience are inseparable, I would also add that, at times, for some people, one is more important than the other. A composer, conductor, arranger, or recording engineer is much more served by theory than playing experience. A singer or player with a lot of natural talent and intuition can lean more on the practical side and less on theory.

Whether you lean more toward theory or more toward playing, it's all fun and rewarding.

ksjazzguitar · #19 11-09-2010, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reg

...great post Kevin... I dig all your posts... I don't agree with them all, but always enjoy reading them...

To be honest I'd worry about the mental health of someone who agreed with everything I said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reg

I think theory might be more in the direction of, ...why something sounds good, " what sounds good " appears like divine knowledge... monk style... Or not...best Reg

To be honest, I look at it in the opposite way. To have an opinion on what sounds good is normal and to use a theoretical structure to predict what will sound good is what theory is for. But to attempt to postulate why it sounds good seems pretentious. But I guess that depends on what you mean by "why" - if you mean "why" in a neuro-chemical sense, then that is the province of PET scan technicians - if you mean "why" in a cosmological, ontological sense, then that is the territory of theologians. In either case, when I'm on the bandstand, I'm not worried about why something sounds good; I'm worried about what sounds good. That is where theory comes in to make a few suggestions.

Throughout history, theoretical innovations have been followed by bursts of creativity as artists explore the new terrains revealed by these hypothetical constructs. I could bust into my well worn speech about my grad research on the epistemological and theoretical revolutions brought on by Rameau's revolution in theory in the 18th century, but that would bore the pants of of most everyone. The short version is: he had heard that things were changing and that the old theory no longer fit. He suggested a new theory and it released an explosion of creativity. I found his discussions of what sounded good to be more interesting and informative than his discussions of why, which often turned into sophmoric, psueuo-religo-scientificish mumbo-jumbo.

If we look any artistic revolution, there is a shift in the underlying theory, and then that new and revealed territory is explored. Again, theory helps creativity, it does not hinder it. When the theory grows inadequate, it changes and reveals new possibilities. To some extent it is artistic exploration suggests new theories, and to some extent new theories suggest new artistic possibilities. The two work hand in hand. If you can find a way to be creative without any theoretical organizing priniciples, then go for it - my brain just isn't good enough to keep track of the 50 terrabytes of info I need without some organizational tools, even if some of them run the risk of being speculative or procrustean.

The thing is to remember that it is just music theory. It is not music immutable law of the universe. The theory changes for different types of music and for different eras - many of which contradict each other (Listen to some Gagaku and tell me they aren't working in a whole 'nother realm.) Theory is a tool, not a cage. It should never say, "You can't play that because I say so." It might say, "That might sound bad within the accepted aesthetic norms of the type and era of music that I am trying to describe. If you're going to make that sound good, it's going to take some work."

OK, it's finally happened, I'm boring even myself. (Usually it's just everyone else.) I'll stop typing now. (For now at least.

)

Peace,
Kevin

PS

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuitaRoland

...Some people at this forum seem to have a lot so say theoretically but you never hear what they do musically - do they ever play music?!...

Where can we hear you play? I've quickly scanned through your posts and I can't find anywhere where you've provided a sample of your playing (please tell me if I missed it.) I see no link to a web page. Many of us have done these things. I showed you mine, now you show me yours.

backliner · #20 11-09-2010, 12:39 PM

Now I DO feel belittled.

Where's my dictionary?

wolflen · #21 11-09-2010, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by backliner

Now I DO feel belittled.

Where's my dictionary?

kevin ate it..?

ksjazzguitar · #22 11-09-2010, 02:16 PM

Hey! They were all perfectly cromulent words.

cosmic gumbo · #23 11-09-2010, 02:54 PM

There is music, and there is jazz. All music should tell a story, but jazz should let you tell YOUR story. Theory can be a tool to help you do it, but depending on theory alone doesn't guarantee a good story.

backliner · #24 11-09-2010, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo

There is music, and there is jazz. All music should tell a story, but jazz should let you tell YOUR story. Theory can be a tool to help you do it, but depending on theory alone doesn't guarantee a good story.

Very good.

I remember an interview with Pat Metheny, and the interviewer asked what kind of scales he used when he was improvising.

PM's response was along the lines of, "That's like asking me what kind of verbs and nouns I use when I'm talking!"

Music Theory is like grammer for speaking a language. When you apply the "rules" your sentences make sense in the context of the conversation at hand.

When you break the rules knowledgeably, it is for effect or emphasis on a point.

If you don't know the grammer you can get by, but your accent will betray you as a non-fluent speaker of the language. That can be ok if your story is compelling. People will overlook the grammer flaws. After all, you only need enough technique to say what you want to say, but like the joke goes about the guy who only plays what he feels: "Well feel something in Bb dude!"

It's gotta blend in context, otherwise it sounds like gibberish while others are being eloquent.

Always a danger for me, sitting in a jazz band and pretending I know my stuff.

I remain a student of the genre however. This site is a valuable resource, and nobody has dissed me without my invitation to do so (good naturedly one hopes).

robertm2000 · #25 11-10-2010, 07:07 AM

Hey - does anyone catch the "negative" value of this forum? I've been playing guitar for a long time and I really like jazz guitar. But I can't play very well at all. The skill that so many of the people hereon keeps me from embarrassing myself by putting forth playing that isn't very good.

But there's another side - I can see what I need to come up to, and it gives me hope that someday I actually can play well enough to do it in public! Till then, be glad I don't make you suffer...

JohnW400 · #26 11-10-2010, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robertm2000

Hey - does anyone catch the "negative" value of this forum? I've been playing guitar for a long time and I really like jazz guitar. But I can't play very well at all. The skill that so many of the people hereon keeps me from embarrassing myself by putting forth playing that isn't very good.

But there's another side - I can see what I need to come up to, and it gives me hope that someday I actually can play well enough to do it in public! Till then, be glad I don't make you suffer...

You can't think like that. I live in an area that is chock full of SERIOUS players both full time and part time pro and just plain hobbyists. And through the years I've been in bands that have shared the bill with some MONSTER players whose names you would recognize. You just have to accept where your level is, strive to improve and just play the best you can. It's not a contest

liponguitas · #27 11-10-2010, 09:53 AM

Hello,

So far I've no reason to conplain about anything or anyone of this fórum.
When I have doubts, everyone always helps. People post examples to help and to share knowledge. When posted myself playing, everyone were educated, crongratulated me about the things that I did ok, and criticized in constructive way the things I did bad and advised me about this aspects. So I love this fórum!

Sorry for my bad english

ksjazzguitar · #28 11-10-2010, 10:00 AM

I'll double down on what John is saying. Don't let your perception that others are better than you keep you from performing. Get out and play, post something - it's how you learn.

If there is an idiot who judges you overly harshly, who cares? I'll admit that sometimes I get annoyed with crappy players, but only when they are putting themselves forward as "God's gift to jazz" when they can't even outline the chord changes. I never get annoyed with a sincere learner (technically we're all learners) who knows what he is and what he's not. (Again, I know what I am and what I'm not.)

Please, post something. Ask for some feedback. Get out and play live if you can. We all started somewhere, so we've all been where you are. I admire anyone who has the courage to step up on stage, with a guitar and a set of changes, and go for it.

Peace,
Kevin

drobniuch · #29 11-10-2010, 12:51 PM

Quote:

There is music, and there is jazz. All music should tell a story, but jazz should let you tell YOUR story. Theory can be a tool to help you do it, but depending on theory alone doesn't guarantee a good story.

'like it

good point

JohnRoss · #30 11-11-2010, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by backliner

Music Theory is like grammer for speaking a language. When you apply the "rules" your sentences make sense in the context of the conversation at hand.

If you don't know the grammer you can get by, but your accent will betray you as a non-fluent speaker of the language. That can be ok if your story is compelling. People will overlook the grammer flaws. After all, you only need enough technique to say what you want to say.....

Very well put, and I think one of GuitarRoland's underlying points was valid - often jazz players do attach too much importance to theory and technique. You can have too much of it, it is a bit like having Shakespeare thrown at you all the time, when quite often all you really want is a readable crime story or whatever. That's nothing against this forum in any way, which has been one of the most helpful and enlightening places I have ever found on the Net. But I sort of understand where GR was at.