Christiaan Van Hemert once again championing "No Theory"

[Clint 55]

But you're disagree with the premise that at the big majority of your work should be transcription and playing?

No, I don't disagree with that. All facets of practice are important to me including playing, studying players, or transcribing. Or practicing arpeggios and trying to build my own lines; or practicing my inversions and trying to build chord melody etc.

[GTRMan]

You're kinda making the point of this thread, which is learn 500 tunes and the rest will take care of it self

Take our resident Troll GTRMan who's been championing theory and hating on Christiaan for being 100% marketing and zero content ... When it came to the crunch his recommendation of theory was just one or two quick courses at Berklee (or where ever, not going to look thru this thread to find an exact quote)


Theory is not rocket science and it's not like we are dumb here. Many of us casual players struggling with jazz have master degrees or more. The thing is knowing what 3 notes make up a C-major chord ain't going to make you sound like Charlie Parker sounding over a C-major chord. Oh .. but what if I learn what all the extensions are called, will that make me sound like CP? Once I know the difference between a b9 and a 9 will I have struck gold?

Knowing the circle of 5ths .. There is the secret to playing in the style of Pat Metheny?

Substitutions? .. Mamma mia, Look at me .. now I'm Pat Martino .. Speaking of Pat Martino, will looking at chords as children of their parent diminished chords improve my playing?

And what about knowing that you can apply 4 different modes of melodic minor over a dominant chord to produce different degrees of tension (with the 7th mode being the most popular) .. Is that what I'm lacking in order to play well?


It's not like we don't know theory on this forum .. as a matter of fact I'm willing to wager that theory knowledge is far larger than actual playing skills. It's just that most of us haven't learned 500 tunes

Disagreeing makes one a "troll" huh? Oh, the indignity! And yeah, I disagree wholeheartedly and make no apologies for it.

1. As the point was made by several of us, it doesn't have to be "OR" it can be, and is, "AND".

2. What are your time estimates stated in both duration and effort, for "learning 500 tunes" - AND - learning means performing at a competent level. Here's mine:

3500 man-hours
750 weeks

Taking two years of music theory in college requires:
704 man-hours
64 weeks - WHILE learning 24 pieces in the same time frame.

The second approach is about 5 times as efficient as the first in man-time, and about 12 times as efficient in calendar time.

Might want to think about throttling back a little on the computer games.

[Lobomov]

Disagreeing makes one a "troll" huh? Oh, the indignity! And yeah, I disagree wholeheartedly and make no apologies for it.

C'mon .. At least admit what you are .. and I dig, life is quite boring these days and we're all losing our minds. But don't bull shit. You are our resident troll here and we love you for it

[GTRMan]

C'mon .. At least admit what you are .. and I dig, life is quite boring these days and we're all losing our minds. But don't bull shit. You are our resident troll here and we love you for it

Bullshit is one word.

[Lobomov]

Bullshit is one word.

Post some of your music, so I can get inspired?

[jameslovestal]

between a b9 and a 9 will I have struck gold?


Edit:
Btw, don't get me wrong .. I'm mostly having fun writing stuff like this ... But end of the day I really wish my first jazz teacher a couple of decades ago would have said. "You want to learn this tune? Well you know, I like this and that version. Let me get you started by showing you some of the most memorable phrases" instead of "Well over these chords play this scale and over this dominant play the melodic minor a step up from the root".

The best guitar teacher I had (Stu Goodis), provided a song a week. Each song was designed to advance some type of jazz musical "concept"; E.g. II\V and II\V\I (Out of Nowhere), or use of a half-step diminish chord connection between a II\V (Body and Soul), non-functional dominate 7th chords (Sweet Georgia Brown) etc...

He would provide 2 sheets of music; one with just the chords and their relationship to the key and if that was altered (e.g. IVDom7 instead of just IV which is major7th and scale that would work over the "unique" part of the song (i.e. the reason why that song is song of the week), etc... Of course the first 5 or so songs had a lot of scale recommendations but after that only a few bars would need them). The other sheet was the chords without any additional notation and the melody.

A CD was provided with a few sections with Stu playing a backing track, the melody, and one soloing over said backing track. In addition he would provide a few versions by guitar players he liked, pointing out specific bars where he felt the guitarist was doing something I should transcript (in order to add that to my bag-of-tricks).

After a year or so and around 50 tunes, I stopped with the lessons and was able to add songs on my own following this overall process \method.

[GTRMan]

Post some of your music, so I can get inspired?

Hey, I thought that was pretty funny. Irony and all that.

[Lobomov]

Hey, I thought that was pretty funny. Irony and all that.

I mean ... Who's advice am I going to follow. Players like Christiaan and Christian that have tons of music on display ... or some random dude with plenty of attitude, but nothing on display?

[GTRMan]

Take his advice if ya like. I'm not giving any. I'm saying there's no need to tell people NOT to study something. It's more productive to tell them what TO do.

And I get the Gypsy approach, it's very down to earth. Paco De Lucia was brilliant and said that he didn't understand a lick of theory, and even said he couldn't, if I recall.

But - Plenty of musicians study music theory and it serves them well. One is to learn it while young, in order to support a life long career/devotion. That's the same as with any other topic one learns in school, right?

Parting shot - even for adults, it doesn't take much time. It's very easy to learn and is enjoyable. Playing and composing are much more challenging.

[christianm77]

Trying to boil it down to a bottom line - you have to be able to *hear* and *feel* music to be able to play it.

Whatever else you do on top of that is fine with me, I honestly don't care. Do what ever helps. (Expecting would be professionals - learn to read as well.)

But the first thing is apparent right away to anyone with ears, so I'd say it's a matter of priority to get it touch with it. If you are in touch with it, the world's your oyster, really.

[christianm77]

I'm not convinced GTRMan has a strong conception of the amount of work it takes to be even a middling professional player.

One important moral function of a guitar teacher to aspiring professionals is to show them this abyss and see if they still want to do it. Lots of ways to do that.

You are Sisyphus pushing the rock up a mountain. It's between you and your psychology whether or not that's your idea or heaven or hell.

[rpjazzguitar]

players that know 500 tunes and they’re gonna tell you that knowing how chords are functioning is a big part of playing this music. Y.

Just a comment on that point. A musician who knows that many tunes and can play them in any key without thinking, may or may not have theoretical knowledge of how chords are functioning, whatever that might mean.

For the sounds that I can hear and have internalized (mostly from playing the sound in multiple tunes for years) I hear the sound in my mind and my fingers go there. I don't think about the "function" of the chord. My fingers just seem to know how to play the sound I'm pre-hearing. I can do it quite well for some sounds and quite poorly for others. I can't explain that, but it has been my experience over decades of playing. Moreover, I can do it for sounds for which I can't recall ever thinking about function.

For example, take I Should Care. The first note of the melody in the standard key is C. I hear a chord in my mind and I know (without being able to explain how) that I can get that sound with xx7978. I can usually hear that application. I can, as an afterthought, analyze it, but I didn't get to it that way and the analysis doesn't help.

In fact, if I understand the comment to which I'm responding, I don't think that people who know a zillion songs accomplish that by thinking at all about chord function. Rather, they learn the song the same way a non-musician can sing a pop tune. You hear it, you remember it. Your vocal cords make the sounds. The musicians we're alluding to do it the same way, except their ears and experience allow them to do it with both melody and harmony. We can all do part of it. If I play a song you know and hit a wrong chord, you'll know it. They do too, but they also know the right one.

[GTRMan]

I'm not convinced GTRMan has a strong conception of the amount of work it takes to be even a middling professional player.

One important moral function of a guitar teacher to aspiring professionals is to show them this abyss and see if they still want to do it. Lots of ways to do that.

You are Sisyphus pushing the rock up a mountain. It's between you and your psychology whether or not that's your idea or heaven or hell.

I'm sure that I don't. But you are setting up strawman arguments, and based on "street" player philosophy. Why? Is it more romantic?


The flip side is that I am convinced that you do have a conception that theory has been taught to many thousands, probably hundreds of thousands of musicians and composers for over 200 years at least. Somehow, somehow, somehow they managed, lol.

My city's symphony first chair violinist can outplay this guy - not improvising mind you - but violin playing, and that's not trash talk. Lots of these great classical musicians and virtuosi are conservatory taught, and most certainly studied theory, plus more.

If classes in theory, composition, counterpoint, conducting - and let's throw literature and history on the pile while we're at it - prevent one from becoming a great musician, how did they do it? Do they have super powers? Do they have more hours in a day than a Gypsy or Blues Man?

So, you are, to use your words, a "middling professional player" or greater, yes? And you said it yourself, you're a theory nerd. So you've managed to become a jazz guitar pro and yet love studying theory as well. I'm sorry but it appears to me that you're arguing against yourself on this point.

Again, I find this to be promotional clickbait and internet chat. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[steve burchfield]

I think Miles said learn the shit and then forget it and just play. Maybe there is no such thing as a wrong note as long as it sounds good, at least in solos

[DonovanT]

You're kinda making the point of this thread, which is learn 500 tunes and the rest will take care of it self

Take our resident Troll GTRMan who's been championing theory and hating on Christiaan for being 100% marketing and zero content ... When it came to the crunch his recommendation of theory was just one or two quick courses at Berklee (or where ever, not going to look thru this thread to find an exact quote)


Theory is not rocket science and it's not like we are dumb here. Many of us casual players struggling with jazz have master degrees or more. The thing is knowing what 3 notes make up a C-major chord ain't going to make you sound like Charlie Parker sounding over a C-major chord. Oh .. but what if I learn what all the extensions are called, will that make me sound like CP? Once I know the difference between a b9 and a 9 will I have struck gold?

Knowing the circle of 5ths .. There is the secret to playing in the style of Pat Metheny?

Substitutions? .. Mamma mia, Look at me .. now I'm Pat Martino .. Speaking of Pat Martino, will looking at chords as children of their parent diminished chords improve my playing?

And what about knowing that you can apply 4 different modes of melodic minor over a dominant chord to produce different degrees of tension (with the 7th mode being the most popular) .. Is that what I'm lacking in order to play well?


It's not like we don't know theory on this forum .. as a matter of fact I'm willing to wager that theory knowledge is far larger than actual playing skills. It's just that most of us haven't learned 500 tunes


Edit:
Btw, don't get me wrong .. I'm mostly having fun writing stuff like this ... But end of the day I really wish my first jazz teacher a couple of decades ago would have said. "You want to learn this tune? Well you know, I like this and that version. Let me get you started by showing you some of the most memorable phrases" instead of "Well over these chords play this scale and over this dominant play the melodic minor a step up from the root".

I think every player you want to sound like(you're list?) would tell you to learn everything you can. It's not what you're doing that will hurt you it's what you're not doing. I understand the want to just transcribe though. I just think it takes more than that to really get inside this music and be able to tell your story.

[Clint 55]

The flip side is that I am convinced that you do have a conception that theory has been taught to many thousands, probably hundreds of thousands of musicians and composers for over 200 years at least. Somehow, somehow, somehow they managed, lol.

If classes in theory, composition, counterpoint, conducting - and let's throw literature and history on the pile while we're at it - prevent one from becoming a great musician, how did they do it? Do they have super powers? Do they have more hours in a day than a Gypsy or Blues Man?

Lmao. Yes, how on earth did they do it?!

[Clint 55]

Learning a bunch of tunes and doing a bunch of transcriptions will open up many doors. But it will never open up the same doors as learning all your inversions and arpeggios all over the neck. They're both important wtf lol.

[Lobomov]

Learning a bunch of tunes and doing a bunch of transcriptions will open up many doors. But it will never open up the same doors as learning all your inversions and arpeggios all over the neck. They're both important wtf lol.

So any clips of you demonstrating how you apply knowing those arpeggios all over the neck to jazz improvisation .. or at least of you playing so that it will inspire me to put in that work?

[DonovanT]

Just a comment on that point. A musician who knows that many tunes and can play them in any key without thinking, may or may not have theoretical knowledge of how chords are functioning, whatever that might mean.

For the sounds that I can hear and have internalized (mostly from playing the sound in multiple tunes for years) I hear the sound in my mind and my fingers go there. I don't think about the "function" of the chord. My fingers just seem to know how to play the sound I'm pre-hearing. I can do it quite well for some sounds and quite poorly for others. I can't explain that, but it has been my experience over decades of playing. Moreover, I can do it for sounds for which I can't recall ever thinking about function.

For example, take I Should Care. The first note of the melody in the standard key is C. I hear a chord in my mind and I know (without being able to explain how) that I can get that sound with xx7978. I can usually hear that application. I can, as an afterthought, analyze it, but I didn't get to it that way and the analysis doesn't help.

In fact, if I understand the comment to which I'm responding, I don't think that people who know a zillion songs accomplish that by thinking at all about chord function. Rather, they learn the song the same way a non-musician can sing a pop tune. You hear it, you remember it. Your vocal cords make the sounds. The musicians we're alluding to do it the same way, except their ears and experience allow them to do it with both melody and harmony. We can all do part of it. If I play a song you know and hit a wrong chord, you'll know it. They do too, but they also know the right one.

people who know a zillion tunes(Jazz and standards on a jazz style) definitely have their shit together. Its not “ohh ii is sub dominant so I could play...uhh ... IV ill play IV! Oh and whats the next Chord I? No, vi? Nope oh its V!! Lol come on just cause you learn them as sounds doesn’t mean you cant investigate the sounds and just cause you learn theory doesnt mean you cant hear.

[Clint 55]

So any clips of you demonstrating how you apply knowing those arpeggios all over the neck to jazz improvisation .. or at least of you playing so that it will inspire me to put in that work?

Sure, just for you I threw together a crappy phone video of me demonstrating the concept of how practicing arpeggios can be applied to making music. And don't get on my case about it not being inspirational music. It's me sucking on a first take demonstrating one way how I utilize theory to practice.

[Lobomov]

My city's symphony first chair violinist can outplay this guy - not improvising mind you - but violin playing, and that's not trash talk. Lots of these great classical musicians and virtuosi are conservatory taught, and most certainly studied theory, plus more.

Lmao. Yes, how on earth did they do it?!

Thing is all those virtuoso usually rise to prominence long before they're old enough to attend conservatory. I'm willing to wager quite a bit of money that the first violinist you mention despite "only" being first chair in your city started playing violin at the age of 4 or maybe 5, if he was a late starter and has put in a sick amount of hours just playing (and since it's classical also reading) music.


Anyways let's enjoy one of the biggest current classical violin stars Hilary Hahn at the age of 15

Btw .. It seems like you have quite the dislike for internet jargon, but never the less .. The official internet term for the virtuoso violin players you describe is Ling Ling's after internet meme Ling Ling. The thing about Ling Ling is that according to legend he practices his violin 40 hours a day!

Let's end with upcoming star Chloe Chua flexing her knowledge of theory at the age of 11

Here she is at the age of 13 giving lessons to two run of the mill (but still with plenty of experience playing in symphony orchestras) classical violinists

Is she focused on notes, chord and theory .. and is it practical stuff like vibrato, tone, looseness of wrist, fingerings and other stuff directly related to playing? Should be the former, shouldn't it?

[Clint 55]

Is she focused on notes, chord and theory .. and is it practical stuff like vibrato, tone, looseness of wrist, fingerings and other stuff directly related to playing? Should be the former, shouldn't it?

It's classical. All they do is play precomposed music. You don't need any theory to do that smarty pants. Besides knowing how to read.

[Lobomov]

Lmao. Yes, how on earth did they do it?!

OK, so the answer to that question is

It's classical. All they do is play precomposed music. You don't need any theory to do that smarty pants. Besides knowing how to read.

That they don't do it?

C'mon .. Let's be coherent here

Sure, just for you I threw together a crappy phone video of me demonstrating the concept of how practicing arpeggios can be applied to making music. And don't get on my case about it not being inspirational music. It's me sucking on a first take demonstrating one way how I utilize theory to practice.

No offence .. But the thing is that I can do that too and have put in year in exercises like that (unfortunately seems like that time would have been better spent actually learning licks)

And you know what ... I sound just as crappy as you, when actually trying to play anything that sound reminiscent of actual jazz like you do at the end of that video. I actually sound a lot like you tbh.


The ultimate nightmare when trying to play with that approach is a tune like Autumn Leaves, which guaranteed will end up sounding blander than English cooking

[Clint 55]

And you know what ... I sound just as crappy as you, when actually trying to play anything that sound reminiscent of actual jazz like you do at the end of that video. I actually sound a lot like you tbh.

I can play better than that. It's me demonstrating material that I have to think about in real time. But yeah I'm not pro and need all the help I can get. So I'm gonna use all the resources available to me: listening and getting the info straight from the music like you say, AND working out theory.

Me on guitar, organ and left hand bass, plus the drum track:

[Clint 55]

The ultimate nightmare when trying to play with that approach is a tune like Autumn Leaves, which guaranteed will end up sounding blander than English cooking.

You have to friggin practice. What do you expect? You'll suddenly feel the gypsy force? You gotta learn the tune, learn the chords everywhere, learn the arpeggios, have melodies and parts that you know work in different places.. It's a lot of work. You don't just arrive one day because of your aural skills.