Does Birelli Lagrene not know theory for real ??

**mooncef** · 08-10-2016, 06:21 PM

I was surprised watching a video where birelli doesn't even know what's a 2 5 1 , i found that realy discomforting for me , but i still doubt he was just joking !!

**monk** · 08-10-2016, 07:04 PM

Ahh, the "benefits" of traditional gypsy jazz training.

If you had started as a very young child and learned to play jazz by ear by the time you were an adult you would probably be able to recognize most any melody or chord change when you hear it.

Don't get me wrong, I think for most of us understanding some amount of theory can be helpful in understanding music but, in the end, music is aural and being able to know and understand what you're hearing as you hear it is, to me, superior to having to filter it through a secondary resource.

When someone speaks to you, you understand what they are saying without having to refer to information learned in high school or college. You don't diagram their sentences in your head or identify every noun, pronoun, adjective and adverb as they speak. You just understand it.

If I could go back in time and choose between the way I learned to play guitar at age 15, by learning Top 40 rock songs off the radio with the help of a chord book and song folios or starting the manouche method with a mentor at age 5, I would choose the latter in a heartbeat.

This is not to say that Bireli may not have some genetic advantages, he may, but there is no way we can argue that he was not blessed with a great environment.

Regards,
Jerome

**mooncef** · 08-10-2016, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by monk

Ahh, the "benefits" of traditional gypsy jazz training.

If you had started as a very young child and learned to play jazz by ear by the time you were an adult you would probably be able to recognize most any melody or chord change when you hear it.

Don't get me wrong, I think for most of us understanding some amount of theory can be helpful in understanding music but, in the end, music is aural and being able to know and understand what you're hearing as you hear it is, to me, superior to having to filter it through a secondary resource.

When someone speaks to you, you understand what they are saying without having to refer to information learned in high school or college. You don't diagram their sentences in your head or identify every noun, pronoun, adjective and adverb as they speak. You just understand it.

If I could go back in time and choose between the way I learned to play guitar at age 15, by learning Top 40 rock songs off the radio with the help of a chord book and song folios or starting the manouche method with a mentor at age 5, I would choose the latter in a heartbeat.

This is not to say that Bireli may not have some genetic advantages, he may, but there is no way we can argue that he was not blessed with a great environment.

Regards,
Jerome

Damn man that's bad news for me

**Cunamara** · 08-10-2016, 09:24 PM

Jazz theory is a teaching tool, not a way to play jazz. If you're thinking "OK, 3rd mode of the harmonic minor over this chord" while you're playing, you're off the mark IMHO. You're playing an exercise, not jazz. I think that's what Bir was talking about when he said to forget that stuff and blow. Someday I hope to be able to stop playing theory and start playing music consistently.

For guitar and keyboards, the layout of the chords on the fretboard tell you most of what you need to know. I keep forgetting this. I mean, it's right bloody there on the fretboard. How much simpler could it be? And I forget that it's RIGHT THERE. Listen to our great-grandfather Charlie Christian- his solos are based around the chord shapes; 70 years ago and he still sounds hipper than most of us.

I dunno how horn players figure it out. They don't have the benefits of having chords right there.

P.S.- some of these guys are shining us on when they say "I don't know any of that theory stuff."

**Runepune** · 08-10-2016, 10:50 PM

Originally Posted by mooncef

I was surprised watching a video where birelli doesn't even know what's a 2 5 1 , i found that realy discomforting for me , but i still doubt he was just joking !!

Oh, Bireli knows his 2-5-1 alright. The guy was just directing him for the video production.

**wintermoon** · 08-11-2016, 12:29 AM

" Listen to our great-grandfather Charlie Christian- his solos are based around the chord shapes; 70 years ago and he still sounds hipper than most of us"

there ya go.
there's a lot of great players that I love, but the most 'organic' to me were Christian and his modern disciple, Wes.
they just sound like they're so natural and flowing.

**kris** · 08-11-2016, 03:15 AM

He play violin and fretless also....very nice!

**kris** · 08-11-2016, 03:28 AM

Great swinging TRIO!

**mooncef** · 08-11-2016, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by Cunamara

Jazz theory is a teaching tool, not a way to play jazz. If you're thinking "OK, 3rd mode of the harmonic minor over this chord" while you're playing, you're off the mark IMHO. You're playing an exercise, not jazz. I think that's what Bir was talking about when he said to forget that stuff and blow. Someday I hope to be able to stop playing theory and start playing music consistently.

For guitar and keyboards, the layout of the chords on the fretboard tell you most of what you need to know. I keep forgetting this. I mean, it's right bloody there on the fretboard. How much simpler could it be? And I forget that it's RIGHT THERE. Listen to our great-grandfather Charlie Christian- his solos are based around the chord shapes; 70 years ago and he still sounds hipper than most of us.

I dunno how horn players figure it out. They don't have the benefits of having chords right there.

P.S.- some of these guys are shining us on when they say "I don't know any of that theory stuff."

I agree with you , but this is kinda depressing for someone who hasn't grown in the right environment , so i still thing there are definetly alternatives, or a great formula to be able to play with complete mastery . the Fretboard knowledge seems to be a common skill in all greats , take birelly for instance you can actualy see and hear he connects arpegios with melodic extensions , but his attitude and groove are just phenomenal . So Yeah i think before any excuse , learning the fretboard entirely and being able to play an arpegio in just any position and modulate to another in any position , that's a great basis to have !

**smokinguit** · 08-11-2016, 07:00 AM

As long as you can hear and understand what you hear, it doesn't matter what you call the things that you hear. You can even make up your own names as a memory aid. But of course other musicians won't understand you when you try to explain things in your own language without the aid of the music. So you have to have a universal language.

And yes Bereli knows that universal language given how long he's been playing. I think he's just trying to make the point that the ears is way more important than the theory (the way in which you explain what you hear) by downplaying his knowledge of it.

**matt.guitarteacher** · 08-11-2016, 07:32 AM

Originally Posted by smokinguit

As long as you can hear and understand what you hear, it doesn't matter what you call the things that you hear. You can even make up your own names as a memory aid. But of course other musicians won't understand you when you try to explain things in your own language without the aid of the music. So you have to have a universal language.

And yes Bereli knows that universal language given how long he's been playing. I think he's just trying to make the point that the ears is way more important than the theory (the way in which you explain what you hear) by downplaying his knowledge of it.

To me this really gets at the whole discussion which is often had on this topic . At a certain level, it's a semantics thing. You have to ask: what is theory? Is it an understanding of being able to apply concepts/sounds used in disparate circumstances to all kind of new situations? This kind of abstraction of ideas/sounds is really the entire purpose of theory, even if it's not what some would call "theory".

All of the greats had this one , even if they didn't know terminology in the same "language " as everyone else. Not knowing the language of someone you're communicating with has nothing to do with knowledge/intelligence. In that sense, I think Wes, Joe and all the rest knew much more "theory" than most.

At a basic level, music theory is a kind of grammar /vocabulary for music - a way of labeling/discussing so that things can be talked about in abstraction with other musicians. If you want to use that definition for theory , then, yes, technically, a lot of the greats didn't know a lot of "theory".

But it's not really controversial and doesn't need to be upsetting to anyone. The greats not knowing all of the vocabulary for discussing music theory and a compositional level doesn't say anything about their actual knowledge. Just like you wouldn't say that someone's an idiot because they don't speak your native language.

TH · 08-11-2016, 07:45 AM

I wonder how Shakespeare would survive in College Grammar 101. I wonder how he would have done on the verbal segment of the SAT. I've talked with very talented classical performers, asked them what they thought of the harmonic structure of a piece, about the bi-tonality outlined in a Debussey prelude, or Bach Invention. Some of them didn't have that awareness, and yet their abilities to play and interpret couldn't be denied.
I'm a woodworker. There are craftsmen in Norway who can build a beautiful boat, from tree to sea, using only a single axe. They know every corner and aspect of their axe and chop, cut, plane, and hammer with the one tool. That's mastery. That's art.
Theory is something we improvisers use to inform our compositional minds when soloing. It is, as Cunamara points out, a tool. The music presents itself as sound and form. How you as a player finds that and shapes that; that's the skill.
Being able to name the tools of the craft or the collection of tools that hangs in your garage is not a metric of how good an artist you are.
The closer you come to the art, the less you need to measure your tool.

Or that's one thought
David

**mooncef** · 08-11-2016, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by TruthHertz

I wonder how Shakespeare would survive in College Grammar 101. I wonder how he would have done on the verbal segment of the SAT. I've talked with very talented classical performers, asked them what they thought of the harmonic structure of a piece, about the bi-tonality outlined in a Debussey prelude, or Bach Invention. Some of them didn't have that awareness, and yet their abilities to play and interpret couldn't be denied.
I'm a woodworker. There are craftsmen in Norway who can build a beautiful boat, from tree to sea, using only a single axe. They know every corner and aspect of their axe and chop, cut, plane, and hammer with the one tool. That's mastery. That's art.
Theory is something we improvisers use to inform our compositional minds when soloing. It is, as Cunamara points out, a tool. The music presents itself as sound and form. How you as a player finds that and shapes that; that's the skill.
Being able to name the tools of the craft or the collection of tools that hangs in your garage is not a metric of how good an artist you are.
The closer you come to the art, the less you need to measure your tool.

Or that's one thought
David

but how would that help a new young student ? it's like telling someone "you should seek true musicienship within yourself"

**Boston Joe** · 08-11-2016, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by TruthHertz

The closer you come to the art, the less you need to measure your tool.

<archer/> Phrasing!

TH · 08-11-2016, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by mooncef

but how would that help a new young student ? it's like telling someone "you should seek true musicienship within yourself"

That, mooncef, is not so much the issue in this thread. The answer is much bigger than a thread discussion. But the quick answer would be "Don't look to Birelli for concrete instruction if he's not playing the music you want to know.
There is an obligation to know what it is you want to know. The clearer that is, the better chance your teacher can help you.
How do you know what you want to do? Listen to as much as you can. Become opinionated with an open mind. Temper what others tell you with knowledge that comes from your love of playing and find play mates to create your experiences with.
This takes time. And yes, Birelli may not be the best teacher for bebop smooth fusion but he is an inspiration to what can be done with a culture of immersion and a love of the craft.
There IS a wealth to be tapped from the musician within yourself. Don't forget it. Learn to ask good questions. Play.
Listen. You'll see what I mean
David

**Drumbler** · 08-11-2016, 02:01 PM

That dude can rock!

**kris** · 08-12-2016, 02:38 AM

what is a Birelli style?
I know he can play everything...;-)

**Robertkoa** · 08-13-2016, 05:24 PM

At one extreme you can absorb all the Theory you want to and it will help.At the other extreme IF you listen to any track or changes and imagine in your mindthe Solo ( your 'mind's ear') the Solo not playing it just hearing or imagining it in your mind....Notice that it all fits the changes or almost all of it...hard to ' imagine' wrong notes that don't fit ...right ? So the OTHER extreme to counterbalance all the Theory is to be able to play what you 'Hear' in your mind...The more you can play from your Mind the less Theory you will need...but the Theory Players who can do ' both approaches' at will may be the most interesting....But having fluid chops ( not speed but fluidity to nearly instantly play what you imagine) and using your 'ear ' - your mind can enable very advanced Playing that a Theorist can analyze...but it was just ' from the Mind' to the Fingers.