The official mad-at-theory thread

[ragman1]

Which question?

Oh, that's simple enough. Of course, the word question doesn't mean a literal question but the issue, the subject we''re discussing.

See, the thing is that if I thought I knew something and found everyone was disagreeing with me, I'd go back and check my facts and repost. Then if everyone still disagreed with it, and I was sure I'd got it right, I'd maybe post a few more times and then leave it. Just shrug and think too bad.

But you don't. You turn on people, accuse them of twisting, lying, misrepresenting, and insult them. So the question is why, isn't it?

[Litterick]

My final vote on this thread.

There is no such thing as 'mad at theory' in the title.
This is an artificial social engineering trick leading to conflict and pointless discussion.
The time wasted on pointless discussion was better spent practicing on the guitar.
To discuss theoretical topics, you need to know your discussion partners well... and most importantly, don't do it via the Internet in the form you see here.There are incomprehensible statements here.
This leads to mutual rage.
That's why I'm going to do this - delete all my posts from this thread.

We've come all this way. You can't turn back now.

[pauln]

My final vote on this thread.

There is no such thing as 'mad at theory' in the title.
This is an artificial social engineering trick leading to conflict and pointless discussion.
The time wasted on pointless discussion was better spent practicing on the guitar.
To discuss theoretical topics, you need to know your discussion partners well... and most importantly, don't do it via the Internet in the form you see here.There are incomprehensible statements here.
This leads to mutual rage.
That's why I'm going to do this - delete all my posts from this thread.
ps.
I'm really an idiot. I've written dozens of posts.

But you were so close, almost there...

[ragman1]

I think he's already done it. We've gone from 27 to 24 pages. It's a miracle. We should all do this moire often. Self-elimination, very healthy.

[Litterick]

Two more pointless arguments and we would have reached 600.

[Jimmy Smith]

My final vote on this thread.

There is no such thing as 'mad at theory' in the title.
This is an artificial social engineering trick leading to conflict and pointless discussion.
The time wasted on pointless discussion was better spent practicing on the guitar.
To discuss theoretical topics, you need to know your discussion partners well... and most importantly, don't do it via the Internet in the form you see here. There are incomprehensible statements here.
This leads to mutual rage.
That's why I'm going to do this - delete all my posts from this thread.
ps.
I'm really an idiot. I've written dozens of posts.

People are compelled to spin the facts, insult, behave otherwise irrationally, and expand the thread incessantly, so something is going on. If it were a benign idea like my why do jazz solidbodies have to always be teles thread, then nothing would happen and it would go away after a page or 2.

Oh, that's simple enough. Of course, the word question doesn't mean a literal question but the issue, the subject we''re discussing.

See, the thing is that if I thought I knew something and found everyone was disagreeing with me, I'd go back and check my facts and repost. Then if everyone still disagreed with it, and I was sure I'd got it right, I'd maybe post a few more times and then leave it. Just shrug and think too bad.

But you don't. You turn on people, accuse them of twisting, lying, misrepresenting, and insult them. So the question is why, isn't it?

Rag, you instigated the last confrontation lmao. You went on a straw man rampage. My conduct isn't disrespectable. Truth telling, being forceful when necessary, but eager to reconcile. Look at the association between both kris and paul and me. I immediately went back to joking with them after they previously instigated. If you decide to be irrational and turn on me then I will defend myself.

You ask why this thread and why the battling? I thought about it and my goal isn't to battle the whole internet. But I frequent here and I don't have to put up with constant disinformation and hostility when situations come up like how Bird used theory, or when I make a hypothetical theory thread. It's not my responsibility to concede to falsehoods, it's aggressors' responsibility to drop it and behave rationally, otherwise it's destructive to the forum.

Some tenets that I've always stood by and which are true:

- theory is only helpful when balanced with ear and not implemented to the exclusion of ear.
- the definition of theory is any information used to explain music other than music itself.
- theory and ear work in parallel, so if you've absorbed enough theory and it's no longer of benefit to you, you can just go focus on ear and other topics. It will never be a detriment.
- theory is best applied in musical ways, rather than tried to be applied in its raw forms.
- I'm taking lessons with a great and he uses theory. I also asked him if most of his peers use theory and he said yes.
- on the whole, the greats used theory as part of their professionalism and musicality so it would follow that theory with ear is a good approach to take.
- saying on the whole the greats did everything aurally (because there wasn't theory back then) is false and is revisionist. We have literal tape, such as the Barney Kessel lesson, of the greats talking about theory.
- some good players were able to develop their approach mostly or exclusively aurally, without theory. These players are the minority, but they obviously exist. Some had a tad of theory or picked up some during their journey, while it's possible that some knew absolutely no theory, like illiterate Django.

[pauln]

"There is no Dana, only Zul"

[Christian Miller]

Well, as someone who is up for arguing the toss about absolutely anything, I have to say this one has exhausted even me. Shall we play some music instead?

[JimmyDunlop]

Well, as someone who is up for arguing the toss about absolutely anything, I have to say this one has exhausted even me. Shall we play some music instead?

lol

[coyote-1]

While theories are not facts, they generally serve as gateways to facts. Because any actual theory is a rational expose of those facts. Theories are not hypotheses.

Off to go play some B#M7 chords before I go to bed.

Yes, I think so. He knows his stuff but doesn't want to get embroiled in verbal, abstract, theoretical disputations.

It's a fact that where there are theories there are always counter-theories. Because theories aren't actual facts they can be argued about, disputed, and breed counter arguments. I think that's what puts most people off because you don't get anywhere. Someone said if you start with theory you end up with theory.

But settling on certain things is good. A CM7 chord is a CM7 chord, we don't need to argue about it. But then along comes a theoretician who'll tell you why a CM7 chord isn't always a CM7 chord and then we're stuck. They've actually done that on your other thread!

So that's why a lot of people don't want to get involved with stupid theory... and why some people love it.

[StringNavigator]

One can smell the frustration on this thread.
20% of the people create 80% of the problems, 80% of the time....

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

One can smell the frustration on this thread.
20% of the people create 80% of the problems, 80% of the time....

That's one theory.

[pauln]

One can smell the frustration on this thread.
20% of the people create 80% of the problems, 80% of the time....

80% of the time 64% of the problems are created by 20% of the people
20% of the time 00% of the problems are created by 20% of the people
80% of the time 16% (20% of 80%) of problems are created by 80% of the people
20% of the time 20% (100% of 20%) of problems are created by 80% of the people
20% of the time 100% of the problems are created by 80% of the people

[Litterick]

20% of the customers provide 80% of the business.

[wolflen]

80% of the time 64% of the problems are created by 20% of the people
20% of the time 00% of the problems are created by 20% of the people
80% of the time 16% (20% of 80%) of problems are created by 80% of the people
20% of the time 20% (100% of 20%) of problems are created by 80% of the people
20% of the time 100% of the problems are created by 80% of the people

and speaking of theories vs truth

10% of men kiss their wife good bye before leaving the house...

90% of men kiss their house good bye before leaving their wife

[ragman1]

"My wife and I fell out over my gambling. I just couldn't leave it alone so she decided she'd had enough. There she is at the gate now with the kids... and they're off!"

[supersoul]

the official mad-at-percentages thread

[Jazzjourney4Eva]

When I turned 40 I said - “I’m 40, so I need to get a girlfriend or a motorcycle”. My wife said “well you go ahead and get a girlfriend if you think anyone will have you, because you’re NOT getting a motorcycle”.

[Jimmy Smith]

Ur mad at theory, Chris.

when you jump, do you float into space or return to the ground?

There are natural laws in nature the same way there are natural laws in music. It's to your benefit to follow them because you can't break them. If you think you can just do whatever, you end up sounding like this guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szWphHk7wGU

[Jimmy Smith]

Good post from princeplanet.

It's cool to tell everyone you don't care about Theory - "I just play what I hear, man ". That's what all the greats did, right? At least that's what they say....

Until you actually transcribe Bird, or Trane, or Wes, or Brecker etc... Hmm, so these guys just happened to "hear" complex harmonic substitutions and sophisticated, highly nuanced melodic devices where chord tones and chromatic embellishments all just happen to appear in perfect order as if by magic? Yeah that's it, these guys must just be true Magicians, so that's why you can never be like them. Hey Wes, how do you know how to play all that stuff, you sure must practice a lot! Nah man, every once in a while I just throw a piece o' meat in the ol' guitar case, y'know...?

Or Bird - Yeah well, you just learn your instrument well enough and then just forget that shit and just wail. Just hear it, feel it and play it, you don't need no theory...

But we know it's their trick, most of them learned their theory real good, for years and years and years. They either never liked to admit it, or they just clean forgot the thousands of hours of headaches it took to join the club of the elites. Just 2 rules to know once you're in the club - Rule #1, never tell them how hard you had to practice. Rule #2, don't you ever, ever, ever dare mention anything about theory, ever!

[Chris236]

Ur mad at theory, Chris.



There are natural laws in nature the same way there are natural laws in music. It's to your benefit to follow them because you can't break them. If you think you can just do whatever, you end up sounding like this guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szWphHk7wGU

I’m afraid you misunderstand or maybe just haven’t been following my posts very closely or possibly both. At any rate, participating in one thread on this topic is plenty.

[James W]

I wonder what 'rules' these guys are adhering to...

[Jimmy Smith]

As they follow less and less rules, the more it sounds like noise, exactly like I said.

[Jimmy Smith]

I’m afraid you misunderstand or maybe just haven’t been following my posts very closely or possibly both. At any rate, participating in one thread on this topic is plenty.

Feel free to quote and point out where I'm incorrect with my logic based on what you said. Otherwise, I'll keep pointing out how your opinions are incorrect as long as you continue with them.

[James W]

As they follow less and less rules, the more it sounds like noise, exactly like I said.

You do realise this very same reactionary stance has been used to decry innovative music throughout history?