The official mad-at-theory thread

[Christian Miller]

And classical musicians are probably an exception.
They play from notes - and this is also theory - because the works are composed according to theory..........you can do it endlessly.

Classical players are not always very knowledgeable about theory. In fact most seem to have little or no interest beyond what they need to know to do the gig, which is mostly reading. The main exceptions are organists and repetiteurs. And composers obviously.

Otoh as a jazzer it can actually be quite hard to gauge another players knowledge of theory because pros rarely discuss it, beyond the practicalities of chart reading and what changes to play on a tune etc.

In general on a straightahead pick up gig I have zero idea unless the conversation turns to it, as opposed to what it normally is which is the football or for my bands for some reason, the cricket.

[ragman1]

Ok. They hypothetically exist. Where are they? And quit strawmanning me. For the 2nd time I never said coming to play music through one's own means is by definition theoretical if it ends up effective.

Jimmy, you've been saying right from the beginning that when a person plays his instrument he is using theory. No question about it.

[Bobby Timmons]

You are out-of-control. I've NEVER said that.

And even if I said something which you interpreted that way, WHY CAN'T I CLARIFY NOW?!!

[ragman1]

You are saying it here:



In other words, if he has no theory, he can't play, period. Therefore anyone who plays must have theory.

[Bobby Timmons]

Usually yes. I'd say even 99% of the time, if someone can effectively play, they probably utilize some theory. Literally everyone on the forum relies on some theory.

I never said coming to understand music through one's own means is by definition theoretical if it ends up effective.

[Bobby Timmons]

Any thread where a participant can say ‘read post #391’ is probably beyond saving tbh.

See post 54,978? :P

[pauln]

pauln says he learned by ear and he prefers to focus on the aural approach now. But then he also knows everything about theory too.

Jimmy, to be clear I taught guitar to myself by ear and have always continued to do so through phenomenological aural qualia. I don't know everything about theory, and I don't know for certain its influence, but in my case I think its potential influences might be of three types:

Prior - this is the formal theory acquired through clarinet and classical piano lessons prior to the guitar. I think those two instruments provided an elevated general musicality so that I already knew a lot about music when I started the guitar; most of the mechanical and conceptual fundamentals were well established, clearing the way to directly self teach by ear. I imagine the influence of this Prior theory was like that of a catalyst (increasing the rate of progress, but itself not being consumed, and remaining unchanged after it).

Back Fill - this is the formal theory of mapped correspondences from things I've discovered by ear on guitar (I discover something on the guitar and recognize it as an instance object of theory). This is ongoing but incidental in that the mapping is passive one-way from guitar to theory (pretty sure this isn't a "leaky" one way mapping). I don't invert the mapping to learn, practice, play, or perform - those processes are strictly active aural to guitar.

Additional - this is the formal theory acquired through basic musical interest for the sake of its conceptual beauty, beyond the Prior and Back Fill theory. This additional theory has substantial indirect influence at the musicality level - in the moment of playing it has no structural, functional, or relational content, just an increasingly reliable intuition of what would sound appropriate, authentic, and beautiful within an expanding range of musical contexts.

[rpjazzguitar]

In decades of jams, rehearsals and gigs, I can recall very little discussion of theory.

What does get talked about are things like

1. Criticizing details of a home made chart -- better ways to beam, to notate stops, holds, accents, locate chord symbols, better font size and so forth. Often, ways to clarify road maps.

2. How to do things in Sibelius, Finale or Musescore.

3. Accurate placement of notes while reading.

4. Horn players talk about mouthpieces.

5. Guitar players will talk about gear.

But, which scale/mode/arp to play over which chord? Hardly ever. Although, when it does come up, everybody knows this stuff.

[AllanAllen]

Jimmy, to be clear I taught guitar to myself by ear and have always continued to do so through phenomenological aural qualia.

What does this even mean?

[SandChannel]

What does this even mean?

Magic.

[mjo]

What does this even mean?

qualia (/?kw??li?/ or /?kwe?li?/; singular form: quale) are defined as individual instances of subjective, conscious experience.

I think that's what he means ? .... It's Freakin Latin ....... the gloves are off now !

There's gonna be 18 pages of this crap, and aside from a brief interlude ..somewhere in there, it all been ... PANTS ! ( did I use that right ? you chaps may have to correct me )

...We all have WAY too much time on our hands -LOL
...If I ask : What is theory anyway ?? ...are we getting 20 more pages ?

...you know, I've been a thread killer in the past....
..just sayin....

[AllanAllen]

Just an endless circle jerk around here…

[Bobby Timmons]

^ Get in and battle them, AA. They're ridiculous.

Jimmy, to be clear I taught guitar to myself by ear and have always continued to do so through phenomenological aural qualia. I don't know everything about theory, and I don't know for certain its influence, but in my case I think its potential influences might be of three types:

Prior - this is the formal theory acquired through clarinet and classical piano lessons prior to the guitar. I think those two instruments provided an elevated general musicality so that I already knew a lot about music when I started the guitar; most of the mechanical and conceptual fundamentals were well established, clearing the way to directly self teach by ear. I imagine the influence of this Prior theory was like that of a catalyst (increasing the rate of progress, but itself not being consumed, and remaining unchanged after it).

Back Fill - this is the formal theory of mapped correspondences from things I've discovered by ear on guitar (I discover something on the guitar and recognize it as an instance object of theory). This is ongoing but incidental in that the mapping is passive one-way from guitar to theory (pretty sure this isn't a "leaky" one way mapping). I don't invert the mapping to learn, practice, play, or perform - those processes are strictly active aural to guitar.

Additional - this is the formal theory acquired through basic musical interest for the sake of its conceptual beauty, beyond the Prior and Back Fill theory. This additional theory has substantial indirect influence at the musicality level - in the moment of playing it has no structural, functional, or relational content, just an increasingly reliable intuition of what would sound appropriate, authentic, and beautiful within an expanding range of musical contexts.

So, far from feral. Had a theory foundation from an early age. Exactly like I said. Most musicians require a theory foundation, some have more ear talent but some foundation and pick up stuff along the way. Feral musicians are so rare that they're barely visible. But theory bad. Ear only is the way to go when it works for almost literally noone.

[Bobby Timmons]

In decades of jams, rehearsals and gigs, I can recall very little discussion of theory.

What does get talked about are things like

1. Criticizing details of a home made chart -- better ways to beam, to notate stops, holds, accents, locate chord symbols, better font size and so forth. Often, ways to clarify road maps.

2. How to do things in Sibelius, Finale or Musescore.

3. Accurate placement of notes while reading.

4. Horn players talk about mouthpieces.

5. Guitar players will talk about gear.

But, which scale/mode/arp to play over which chord? Hardly ever.

I talk theory with my pro teacher. He teaches me in theory. When we listen to each other, we comment on what we liked using theory. The other day he said he liked the whole tone run I did. He didn't say 'I liked that sequence that went la la la la.'

[Bobby Timmons]

There is such a thing as artistic expression.
Totally overlooked by this crazy discussion about the importance of theory.
Why are there works of art and trash?
Soon someone will come along and say it's because of the theory.
I think it's a more complex phenomenon.
What I'm trying to say from the very beginning.
As you can see, the theory can be discussed from different points of view.
And one more thing, I'm not sure that everyone knows what it means to play jazz.
You must have experience playing for an audience in various group configurations.
Yes, we have discussions for discussion - just theory.

Yes kris, telling the truth about artistic expression requiring sound playing - which requires theory for the vast majority of people - really means that those people who are only looking to tell the truth in fact overlook artistic expression. You just will not stop straw manning will you?

[Bobby Timmons]

What's next, 'I know you are but what am I'?

You really are displaying your deep seated mad-at-theory complex.

[Bobby Timmons]

You obviously have a complex. Posts I make which are true cause you to lash out with irrational and emotionally unstable posts that sound like some 12 year old.

[Bobby Timmons]

I have played concerts. Do you think you're the only one who plays shows? Lol. I've played gigs in bands and solo piano.

[Bobby Timmons]

Why? What does that have to do with me posting rationally and you posting like a dumbass?

[Bobby Timmons]

I'm going to sleep.

[m_d]

Ear only is the way to go when it works for almost literally noone.

And 2+2=5?

[Bobby Timmons]

^ Is that your argument that 2+2=5? Where are the people who know zero theory? Oh yeah, they're less than 1% of musicians? Are you guys going full retard or what?

A basic jazz standard and you are assisted by notation...come on.
I know these recordings. Virual jam---I mean.
I meant something from a concert with the audience

You really need help. I just have the book sitting there, Autumn Leaves isn't even up. That's the new real book. I'm playing Autumn Leaves in G minor which isn't even in the new real book. I can play Autumn Leaves in any key from memory. Let's hear you do that. What was the premise of hearing one's playing level again?

[StuartF]

For a generally polite forum, this thread is an uncharacteristic bout of pecker measuring.

[Bobby Timmons]

^ Bring up totally rational truths to kris that some theory in addition to ear is essential for most musicians and he goes full retard due to his mad-at-theory complex and starts looking for ways to attack. Unfortunately for him, I play well and there's nothing to attack so he had to try to fabricate one.

[Christian Miller]

Real advice: theory or no theory if you want to be booked for gigs, try not to be unpleasant