Why you should be mad at theory

[Lionelsax]

The interesting thing with jazz is that there is less theory than in classical, I mean less rules or laws.

[Christian Miller]

Yes, I clearly remember, back in the guitar school, there was three kind of lessons, the usual face to face with my guitar teacher, an ear training / theory in group, and a and a quintet exercise with rythm section and a horn player. In this band exercise, literally after all solos the teacher said good or nice or interesting (meaning terrible), and always said "too much, try to play less". Back then I did not even understood, what he meant. Now I understand at least, but still can not do.

Just a side note associating to the other thread, I can imagine what he would say if Pat Martino would participate: "Excellent.... but too much, try to play less"

all guitar college guitar teachers obsess over Larry Carlton and the student who sounds most like Larry Carlton is deemed to be the one who is best.

This is an objective fact.

I don’t know why this is.

[Litterick]

Beato posted a YouTube about theory, today, but then removed it.

[supersoul]

dont have to like or listen to modern classical, but serious musicians take it seriously, if you doubt that, watch this:

Thanks for posting this. Brian Ferneyhough is someone I've never gotten. He's always been the dude who writes music that is impossible. When I've listened in the past I couldn't find a way into it that resonated inside me. But this video is enlightening. Especially the microtonal details as well as how they deal with rhythms and timing.

[Christian Miller]

[QUOTE=Litterick;1248719]Beato posted a YouTube about theory, today, but then removed it.[/QUOTE

cool story bro

[Gabor]

Beato posted a YouTube about theory, today, but then removed it.

I would not go too far with this. It is possible, that he discovered it can be improved, or discovered it is not PC enough (never enough nowadays and it is counting) , or Youtube removed it, claiming copyright violation... etc

[Jonah]

The skeleton of function works great for Jazz, as it’s sufficient information for players to choose the whatever voicings, extensions or subs they prefer.


It’s insufficient info for CP classical music, as the structure is contrapuntal. The Roman numerals and function don’t matter so much practically (and function can often be debatable with multiple ‘correct’ answers). Figured bass has really helped me with classical guitar music (particularly as my muscle memory is not what it once was). I use sort of a lazy hybrid system writing out things like dim 7 chords where the figured bass
gets complicated

Functions are important on the level of the form including the example you attached.
Even of the terminology came later. I am convinced it describes the language in concern of its basic semantics of it very correctly.

Figured bass is much more practical indeed, it is much more about what is going on now and what happens next.
But the form is not described bt figured bass conception at all. Even cadenses (though they are grouped together and specially high-lighted) are treated as some practical cases of voice-leading.

But if we look at the music itself we clearly see that functional tonality defines the form and the way the composer treats it in every particular case at least from the high baroque period.

[Christian Miller]

Yeah! Jonah’s here.

[Christian Miller]

Functions are important on the level of the form including the example you attached.
Even of the terminology came later. I am convinced it describes the language in concern of its basic semantics of it very correctly.

Figured bass is much more practical indeed, it is much more about what is going on now and what happens next.
But the form is not described bt figured bass conception at all. Even cadenses (though they are grouped together and specially high-lighted) are treated as some practical cases of voice-leading.

But if we look at the music itself we clearly see that functional tonality defines the form and the way the composer treats it in every particular case at least from the high baroque period.

yeah, I mean talking about something simple enough for my brain, simple binary form or something. The way the A section in the Scarlatti (K27) I was looking at goes Am-C and the B goes C-Em-Am. Or the form of a two part invention. So you can see that as an obvious set of functional key relations and the music punctuated by various cadences. Yes that works. (And later it obvious gets more involved as sonata form begins to develop properly.)

Looking at for example, Fenaroli, even though his basses aren’t in those classic forms it’s clear how much he is preparing the student to make these types of near modulations seamlessly and at the drop of a hat and develop melodic material from very limited cues in the bass part. It’s interesting how little of this is explicitly stated afaik in the original sources we have. It’s all in the basses. You can talk about theory, but there’s not that much and a lot of what we have was (as I think you may have said once) written down for the benefit of amateurs or the weaker students as standards fell during the later 18th and early 19th centuries.

I suspect we may overestimate the importance of pedagogy. And we are dealing with students in early childhood who learn by 24hr immersion very quickly (if they have talent which they all had in order to be selected for composition studies at all.)

I’ve read comparative studies of apprenticeships in different trades and all over the world (from West African tailors to meat cutters as well as, of course, the old touring band apprenticeships in jazz) and one thing they have in common is not much direct, obvious explanatory teaching, and an emphasis on commercial activity from day one. (This last point was 100% true of the C18 conservatories. The students were going to make money for the school.)

It’s also important to note Partimento and figured bass is step two of a three step training system. The first step was in fact solfeggio which involved the study of melody and embellishment of simple melodic figures such as La sol ti fa and so on. The third step was a thorough study of counterpoint.

Figured bass itself is of course, unnecessary beyond the first steps of partimento study. There’s part of me that wonders how much it was used in the real Naples schools.

Anyway, I’ve softened my position somewhat from the last time we chatted about this and I find functional harmony ideas quite convenient as do several of the classical improvisers I follow such as Nicola Canzano (parallel fifths on YouTube) and Michael Koch (en blanc et noir). For instance to typify a thematic statement as I-V-I makes sense to the modern student and covers a lot of situations in real music.

Anyway both the scholarship and the interest of musicians in applying these approaches seems to be developing fast.

[Jonah]

I find many Feranoli's partimenti quite close to classical tradition. In many cases I can see that he clearly presumes a student to use very particular solution.

It is also true that one cannot lear to modulate in classical manner without knowing how to do it in spcific pratical way (that is voice-leading).

But in my opinion from creative point of view it is also important that one can feel (I do not say understand) why one does it.

Modulation, change of key, type of cadence etc. - they all express something.

Music is tricky often becasure a capable student can learn quite easily to manipulate with tools to make something acceptable within the idiom (which happend a lot in baroque or callsical time a lot).
But what puts Handel or Mozart aside from a mass of educated musicians of their periods? That they were capable to express complex meanings with their music, not just being nice and sweet but 'speak' about love, despaire, truth, betrayal, hope...

And I think it is important to lead a student into that immidiately - it is not big difference from jazz in that sense (though jazz is much simpler in its means).... making a kid or a student feel that it is about creating something lively - charaters, story, plot, drama... not just combination of 'tricks' that would please the ear.

And regarding partimenti - in my opinion it is important that students of those days could hear the examples of very good music all the time so practical thing was there in their study but ethetical thing was just there in the air - they could hear what the real outcome could be.
Today using exclusively partimenti can lead to mechanic combination of patterns that sound ok, that can please with their general flow but that do not express much meaning really.

To sum it up I think it is important to show a student how composers used it to render meanings.
Why is it modulating (and why not immidiately)? Why is it half cadence here? Why does this sequence show up here and then is interrupted? Why we seem to expect here to hear a modulation but it does not happen? And then how all of this is realized in specific voice leading, melodies, orchestrations etc.?

[Jonah]

yeah, I mean talking about something simple enough for my brain, simple binary form or something. The way the A section in the Scarlatti (K27) I was looking at goes Am-C and the B goes C-Em-Am.

For me the things I hear immidiately are those that make the form like a short intro at the beginning then descending sequence and so on.
And how the material represented there shows up in other sections and all things interact making the whole picture.
Those are the the things that sound to me as compositional choice and statement.

[Litterick]

I would not go too far with this. It is possible, that he discovered it can be improved, or discovered it is not PC enough (never enough nowadays and it is counting) , or Youtube removed it, claiming copyright violation... etc

It was just an observation.

Here's one he posted a year ago.

[DonovanT]

Ellington, strayhorn, mingus, powell, monk, coltrane, parker

[Jonah]

The way the A section in the Scarlatti (K27) I was looking at goes Am-C and the B goes C-Em-Am.

It is in B minor I guess? Maybe you played through some guitar transcriprion?

This small sonata is so imformative despite its simplicity and small size.

To me it is like an intimate letter... or a short memory travel (or a brief flirt maybe?)
there are so may different feelings and 'thought'... that small intro, 'affirmation of the key', representing main thematic material. It is like we approached some small baroque mansion and see immidiately its facade before we enter it... then descending diatonic sequence with simple but delicate polymetry it is like we are inside already and involved into the flow of some reminiscence - it is so short but gives such a strong feel of longevity, long flow of time... and then the modulation begins using the theme from the intro... what seemed affimative and solid at the biginning leads us somewhere, this quiet and spacious flow is interrupted with something not quite expected and the motives of the stable and harmonious faced begin to intervene and move.. and then we go to the dominant of the new key for a few bars - and the texture is the same as it was in the quiet sequence before... but it has more tension but still not much troubled (and it lasts so long!) as we suddenly came on the 'terrace' of the memory and it is captivating but we understand that we cannot be there for long, nothing changes we should move on but the time stands still for a moment and then it easily resolves into quite moving diatonic sequence - the flow goes on... and then it should summurized somehow because it is high culture)) - we cannot leave feelings too much unpolished, as we began with a proper opening we should also conclude properly.
But we hear well and we remember we are in a different key, and things cannot be ended just like this.

Things return in the new disguise - modulating material again comes from the intro - it shifts so quickly and dramatically, how could it come that far? It seemed so solid and reliable?
It modulates to F#minor and now this dominant spacious view returns but it seems much more diturbing now and its release with descending is rather painful than soothering.. it does not promise real relief and yes.. it goes up and we return in the main key (B minor) but again on its dominant ... and this time it sounds so long, and we are concious we are back but everything is different, that view from the 'terrace' that we saw in the beginning now brings such a different feeling - because it is penetrated by all the things that happened and its release into the diatonic sequence becomes an acceptence of the things how they are... and the conclusion (with more extended sequnce) is like lust emmotional flare before everuthing is summurized and the letter is signe and sealed properly.

Of course imagery I used can be my personal - I need to describe it somehow... but I think the meanings it represents are correct.

[Christian Miller]

Yes sorry, the guitar transription takes it down a step .

[Christian Miller]

It is in B minor I guess? Maybe you played through some guitar transcriprion?

This small sonata is so imformative despite its simplicity and small size.

To me it is like an intimate letter... or a short memory travel (or a brief flirt maybe?)
there are so may different feelings and 'thought'... that small intro, 'affirmation of the key', representing main thematic material. It is like we approached some small baroque mansion and see immidiately its facade before we enter it... then descending diatonic sequence with simple but delicate polymetry it is like we are inside already and involved into the flow of some reminiscence - it is so short but gives such a strong feel of longevity, long flow of time... and then the modulation begins using the theme from the intro... what seemed affimative and solid at the biginning leads us somewhere, this quiet and spacious flow is interrupted with something not quite expected and the motives of the stable and harmonious faced begin to intervene and move.. and then we go to the dominant of the new key for a few bars - and the texture is the same as it was in the quiet sequence before... but it has more tension but still not much troubled (and it lasts so long!) as we suddenly came on the 'terrace' of the memory and it is captivating but we understand that we cannot be there for long, nothing changes we should move on but the time stands still for a moment and then it easily resolves into quite moving diatonic sequence - the flow goes on... and then it should summurized somehow because it is high culture)) - we cannot leave feelings too much unpolished, as we began with a proper opening we should also conclude properly.
But we hear well and we remember we are in a different key, and things cannot be ended just like this.

Things return in the new disguise - modulating material again comes from the intro - it shifts so quickly and dramatically, how could it come that far? It seemed so solid and reliable?
It modulates to F#minor and now this dominant spacious view returns but it seems much more diturbing now and its release with descending is rather painful than soothering.. it does not promise real relief and yes.. it goes up and we return in the main key (B minor) but again on its dominant ... and this time it sounds so long, and we are concious we are back but everything is different, that view from the 'terrace' that we saw in the beginning now brings such a different feeling - because it is penetrated by all the things that happened and its release into the diatonic sequence becomes an acceptence of the things how they are... and the conclusion (with more extended sequnce) is like lust emmotional flare before everuthing is summurized and the letter is signe and sealed properly.

Of course imagery I used can be my personal - I need to describe it somehow... but I think the meanings it represents are correct.

Yes, I really like it. The first few times I played through it I was thinking - repeat the same V to V6/4 move so much in the A? Why? Bach wouldn't have done that!

And now I realise it builds up tension beautifully into that cascade bass phrase afterwards using a development of the same figuration and some ravishing suspensions. It really tells a story, especially when he develops that material in the B section.

[Jonah]

Yes, I really like it. The first few times I played through it I was thinking - repeat the same V to V6/4 move so much in the A? Why? Bach wouldn't have done that!

And now I realise it builds up tension beautifully into that cascade bass phrase afterwards using a development of the same figuration and some ravishing suspensions. It really tells a story, especially when he develops that material in the B section.

I do not know who would actually at the time? Even Vivaldi with his motoric repetitive textures could not do such thing
In section B on F#7 chord it sounds like it never ends... I think it might seem quirky for contemporaries , provocative even (though quite in the spirit of that period).
But he uses it so convincingly and artistically. It leaves you behind just thinking: I would not be able to that....
Even in comparison with early classical period when these repeats of small patterns became very common Scarlatti still sounds very daring and fresh (an unretentious at the same time).

It also seems that exact repetition of elements is a part of his personal vocabulary. There are sontas that seem to be almost completely built on it. Like every idea - it can be 1 bar, 2 bars or more - is exactly repeated. And then some bigger structure can be repeated in its turn.
I do not know where it comes from but I suspect it can be partly connected with Spanish folk music influence with its strong percussive pulse and lots of repeated harmonic or textural patterns.
Flamenco improvization often 'sits' very long on unresolving repeated harmony. Though it is rather modal by nature (sometimes it does not resolve) but in context of Scarlatti's music it is invoved in functional relations.

[BWV]

Functions are important on the level of the form including the example you attached.
Even of the terminology came later. I am convinced it describes the language in concern of its basic semantics of it very correctly.

Figured bass is much more practical indeed, it is much more about what is going on now and what happens next.
But the form is not described bt figured bass conception at all. Even cadenses (though they are grouped together and specially high-lighted) are treated as some practical cases of voice-leading.

But if we look at the music itself we clearly see that functional tonality defines the form and the way the composer treats it in every particular case at least from the high baroque period.

Not sure i agree, the figured bass IS the form for Bach preludes, for example it contains all the info you need as the form is determined by stock bass line patterns. you dont need function to describe the fact that a binary form piece modulates to the 5th scale degree and back, and the intermediate term stuff can be described with schema. Function also gets in the way of understanding some of the more chromatic harmony of the period like the Mozart Fantasy in C or Chopin’s Em Prelude

[Jonah]

Not sure i agree, the figured bass IS the form for Bach preludes, for example it contains all the info you need as the form is determined by stock bass line patterns. you dont need function to describe the fact that a binary form piece modulates to the 5th scale degree and back, and the intermediate term stuff can be described with schema. Function also gets in the way of understanding some of the more chromatic harmony of the period like the Mozart Fantasy in C or Chopin’s Em Prelude

I can partly agree about preluding and fantasies that have an improvizational character and often connected with the logic of what is going on right now (but still often this logic is ruled by the overall view of tonal relationships within a form).
Besides in Mozart times fantasia is relatively rare genre - let's take all his sonatas and symphonies and operas and see how key relashionships work there.
Though even in D minor fantasy I think key relationships are very important.
Chopin is a whole different story - first of all he himself stands apart from the mainstream of language (even in bigger pieces he often treats key changes formally - he does not seem to be much interested in functional relationships). Secondly his preludes are an interesting development of the improvizational form - they are by nature spontaneous but he made them perfect written compositions.
Lets take Schubert (even his Impromptus) or Schumann (especially) and see how it works there.

What I mean is that the tonal relationships describe general composition - like in painting. How in particular it is realized is voice-leadings, themes etc.: drawing, colours and characters, plot.

Can we dive more into it? I mean go into actual examples. It may be really intresting.


PS
D minor (or C minor on keyboard) prelude you quoted above seems to me an exciting example of probably a sample work for students... what one can do and how one can treat things in semi-improvizational form.
I agree in that case it can be in a great deal described with a figured bass but still I cannot but see there strong tonal form - Bach is always very determined in that sense (not that he thinks of it litterally, he just have the sense of it) - however great an improvizer he was, he was still in my opinion a composer of written music and he always felt music this way. And there is always a sense of all the form present in his music any moment.

for example Weiss is a good example of predominantly an improvizer who wrote down his improvizations.

[ChazFromCali]

This guy is mad at theory. He's mad at everything... in fact he's the Angriest Guitar Player in the World.

[Christian Miller]

This guy is mad at theory. He's mad at everything... in fact he's the Angriest Guitar Player in the World.

and tell me… is he wrong??

[Bobby Timmons]

I love that clip lol.

[BWV]

I can partly agree about preluding and fantasies that have an improvizational character and often connected with the logic of what is going on right now (but still often this logic is ruled by the overall view of tonal relationships within a form).
Besides in Mozart times fantasia is relatively rare genre - let's take all his sonatas and symphonies and operas and see how key relashionships work there.
Though even in D minor fantasy I think key relationships are very important.
Chopin is a whole different story - first of all he himself stands apart from the mainstream of language (even in bigger pieces he often treats key changes formally - he does not seem to be much interested in functional relationships). Secondly his preludes are an interesting development of the improvizational form - they are by nature spontaneous but he made them perfect written compositions.
Lets take Schubert (even his Impromptus) or Schumann (especially) and see how it works there.

What I mean is that the tonal relationships describe general composition - like in painting. How in particular it is realized is voice-leadings, themes etc.: drawing, colours and characters, plot.

Can we dive more into it? I mean go into actual examples. It may be really intresting.


PS
D minor (or C minor on keyboard) prelude you quoted above seems to me an exciting example of probably a sample work for students... what one can do and how one can treat things in semi-improvizational form.
I agree in that case it can be in a great deal described with a figured bass but still I cannot but see there strong tonal form - Bach is always very determined in that sense (not that he thinks of it litterally, he just have the sense of it) - however great an improvizer he was, he was still in my opinion a composer of written music and he always felt music this way. And there is always a sense of all the form present in his music any moment.

for example Weiss is a good example of predominantly an improvizer who wrote down his improvizations.

although contradicting my previous post, a good portion of the WTC preludes cannot be construed as improvisations, many are binary form pieces and 2 or 3 part inventions - take the Am prelude from Book 2, here is a two part invention in binary form with invertible counterpoint between the two voices. In the B section each part is inverted - so not something easily improvised

still seems to me that form and function are potentially orthogonal - pieces without functional harmony - either Josquin or Carter- have similar formal considerations as tonal ones.

Schumann is one of my favorite composers and have tried to arrange some works for guitar, so curious how function becomes more important as ITSM that formally Schumann is like prog rock and he typically tried to obscure textbook tonal formulas

[Christian Miller]

So I’m not making out this is simple or easy or that Bach was not a genius. But there’s a nuts and bolts aspect to this.

Hearing this my brain goes - That’s a very nice treatment of a chromatic lamento at the start. I should nick that and put it on the opening Fenaroli book 4, no2. Or maybe play it on Blue Skies lol.

Melodically it’s also something I recognise despite the chromaticism, the sort of thing I’ve used already (and in fact the basic schema is very common in the jazz standards rep).

In fact, If you have something like this as the backbone the invertability of the counterpoint more or less takes care of itself; everything else is ornamentation, you just need to remember what ornaments (such as diminutions) you are using which you need to do anyway to give your improvisations a sense of motivic unity. Because of this Fenaroli, for instance, gets into problems in invertible counterpoint very quickly.

Perhaps a more familiar example is the guide tones/shell voicing of cycle 4 progressions as jazzers would call them. These can be freely inverted, provided the melody is a diminution of the notes (1 3 7) in each chord. Needless to say Bach provides many examples of diminutions and explorations if this basic framework, as do all baroque composers.

So you have these pre baked counterpoint schemes than can be embellished and combined. It’s not like Fux…. I can actually pick out a lot of this listening to this WTC example, complex as it is. It’s also why a lot of student fugues sound weird - they haven’t learned the formulae and how to artfully use them. They’ve just plugged away and avoided consecutives.

Tbh the more I work on moti de basso and Schemata the more I find myself just hearing these elements in the music of the era. Which is nice.

None of which is to say it’s easy or even achievable, but I understand a bit better how something like that could be done. Anyway Mortensen has a book out now that breaks down improvising fugues. Weiss could do it apparently… so…. Maybe

As far as repeats go… again I think it’s tempting to see improv and composition as very a black and white distinction but if I’ve learned anything from partimento nothing is that simple. If you have a written out bass for instance, improvising in binary form becomes much more possible. And presumably advanced improvisers could do this mentally. Working on this sort of thing makes anyone a better improviser… the ability to recall and develop what you play is an important skill of course.

(I really don’t know the WTC as well as I should not being a keys player)

All this is both incredibly frustrating to apply on guitar even in its simplest forms (simple partimento for example) and also suggests to me that musicians became conversant with this kind of shenanigans very quickly. None more so than Bach.

(I’ve kind of moved away from partimento because so much of it is built around the capabilities of the keys. While I want to get better at imitative textures in general, the keyboard basses are too florid for my purposes. Anyway.)

Bach is problematic for study of historical improv through this lens. It’s not to say he couldn’t improvise this stuff - HE may well have been, obviously, but it’s hard for us to improvise this stuff haha. (Although I’m not ruling out that his written music may have been quite different to his improvised. It’s hard to tell obviously.)

The Italian composers are more immediately useful models to follow stylistically, even though as Jonah points out the effect of a Scarlatti piece is rather greater than the sum of its parts.

[Jonah]

Schumann is one of my favorite composers and have tried to arrange some works for guitar, so curious how function becomes more important as ITSM that formally Schumann is like prog rock and he typically tried to obscure textbook tonal formulas

Same here. I love any Schumann. It is interesting that he never sounds inert. I mean his compositional style is much based around some particular texture he finds and sticks to it (or refers to it) throughout (a few in big works), and seems to be very conventional but then he makes such unexpected moves that you clearly understand that he is totally moved byt the story or meaning because a composer who just knows the tools just would not have done it. It is especially noticeable in his miniatures like Kinderszenen, Ambum for the Young, Waldszenen... they seem so simple but even within this short form he seems to go the image or character or story.
And another thing - his music is very dense, so many things happen within very short time...