How many here understand music theory?

PolarityMan

@guitarfishbay ;
Yes, you're right and none of those factors are dealt with in traditional music theory to my knowledge which is kinda my point.

The closest you will get is in mixing / production theory I reckon and that is often at best subjective, you can get different guys saying totally contradictory things, plus it is to an extent also driven by the context of what else is being released at the time.

viz

stratman3142 said:

PolarityMan said:

...Interesting point around different keys having different characters, I wonder how much of that is due to temperament of the instruments.

I have to confess I can't hear that at all, not having perfect pitch. I can generally tell that a guitar is detuned below E, when I hear a track, but that's about as far as it goes and is probably more to do with the sound/tone.

It's a relative pitch issue, not an absolute pitch issue, on instruments that are not equally-tempered. The intervals between each semitone are not identical, so when you transpose you get a different character. Hence Bach's "well-tempered clavier" which was not equally-tempered but "well-tempered" ie, optimised for certain keys. So for the pieces in "bad" keys, he had to avoid certain intervals and even so they pieces had a very unusual characteristic. It's really noticeable. (You would definitely notice it)

viz

guitarfishbay said:

viz said:

No they don't; I was being tongue in cheek, quoting from Spinal Tap when I said D minor was the saddest key. 

I mean, some may argue that the resonance of the piano might affect certain keys, or that the positions of the black notes may affect the way you actually play, but all things being equal, Schubart's premise only works on just or well-tempered instruments. 

But if you reference the piano chart I posted eariler - the pitches do have relevant frequencies and this will matter for the reproduction of the notes, which in turn can influence the feel.

All speakers have a range...  guitar cab speakers, HiFi speakers, PA speakers.  Even acoustic instruments have a frequency range when you think about it - all things being equal a bigger guitar body is going to resonate deeper and with more lower frequencies than a smaller bodied one.

All frequencies have a pitch - so instruments will be excited in different ways by different pitches due to their resonant frequencies and frequency bandwidth/response.

I think it's possibly quite complex with a lot of factors

Yes, you're right, I mentioned that in my post about resonance, but the main point I was trying to make was about tuning systems, which has a far greater effect. 

Edit - your piano picture just shows the 12-TET frequencies, so I'm not sure what you mean by "relevant" frequencies with respect to the pic. Though I do agree with the point in general. 

Ravenous

adampeter said:

Time sigs blow my tiny mind, outside of the bog standard 3/4 or 4/4 im lost

Have you noticed in "Money" from Pink Floyd - most of the tune is in 7/4.  7 beats.

...Except when the instrumental/solo comes in and it goes to 4/4.  So we're going from 7 beats to what sounds in context more like a straight ahead 8 beats. It sounds (to me) like it's going into high gear at that point, even though the tempo doesn't vary that much.

This is an example of the things you notice with a little theory, if you're interested. (But if you're not interested, it doesn't matter.)

guitarfishbay

PolarityMan said:

Yes, you're right and none of those factors are dealt with in traditional music theory to my knowledge which is kinda my point.

The closest you will get is in mixing / production theory I reckon and that is often at best subjective, you can get different guys saying totally contradictory things, plus it is to an extent also driven by the context of what else is being released at the time.

Well there are many potentially successful ways to arrange or mix the same piece of music.

Understanding the notes being tied to frequencies is useful regardless of the approach you then take.

Similarly to knowing the notes of a scale or potential harmonies are useful even if you then just write a piece of music by ear without thinking consciously about the theory behind it.

TimmyO

Ravenous said:

adampeter said:

Time sigs blow my tiny mind, outside of the bog standard 3/4 or 4/4 im lost

Have you noticed in "Money" from Pink Floyd - most of the tune is in 7/4.  7 beats.

...Except when the instrumental/solo comes in and it goes to 4/4.  So we're going from 7 beats to what sounds in context more like a straight ahead 8 beats. It sounds (to me) like it's going into high gear at that point, even though the tempo doesn't vary that much.

This is an example of the things you notice with a little theory, if you're interested. (But if you're not interested, it doesn't matter.)

Foo Fighters - Times Like These - I used to struggle with the timing in "that" section until someone pointed out it was 11 bars of 7/4 - once you hear that you can't get it wrong! 

guitarfishbay

viz said:

Edit - your piano picture just shows the 12-TET frequencies, so I'm not sure what you mean by "relevant" frequencies with respect to the pic. Though I do agree with the point in general. 

Probably just a case of not using the correct word.

I just mean that  Musical Pitch = Frequency... the other useful fact being octave up doubles the frequency etc.  I find it useful to know and reference, as opposed to just guessing by ear what to do with an EQ.

I agree that if the intervals are imperfect it will influence the sound.  Actually for some music, to get the really clean sounding 'modern production' sound with guitars you do need to re-tune a guitar and do a lot of punch ins for recording, to keep the intervals as perfect as possible.  Even with good fretting and picking technique a guitar can't be played perfectly in tune.  It does change the feel as the overtones end up being clearer if it's all in tune, vs beating slightly against each other if the intervals aren't quite close enough to perfect.

A lot of 60s and 70s stuff isn't really in tune compared to modern standards (i.e. closer to perfect intonation), even though most of the time the guitars were probably 'in tune', as in the open strings were correct.  It does really affect the feel, at least to me anyway.

octatonic

viz said:

As per my post above. I think this is for a piano tuned to quarter comma meantone in C. 


C Major
Completely Pure. Its character is: innocence, simplicity, naïvety, children's talk.

...

B Minor
This is as it were the key of patience, of calm awaiting ones's fate and of submission to divine dispensation.

LOL.
That is hilarious.

viz

guitarfishbay said:

viz said:

Edit - your piano picture just shows the 12-TET frequencies, so I'm not sure what you mean by "relevant" frequencies with respect to the pic. Though I do agree with the point in general. 

Probably just a case of not using the correct word.

I just mean that  Musical Pitch = Frequency... the other useful fact being octave up doubles the frequency etc.  I find it useful to know and reference, as opposed to just guessing by ear what to do with an EQ.

I agree that if the intervals are imperfect it will influence the sound.  Actually for some music, to get the really clean sounding 'modern production' sound with guitars you do need to re-tune a guitar and do a lot of punch ins for recording, to keep the intervals as perfect as possible.  Even with good fretting and picking technique a guitar can't be played perfectly in tune.  It does change the feel as the overtones end up being clearer if it's all in tune, vs beating slightly against each other if the intervals aren't quite close enough to perfect.

A lot of 60s and 70s stuff isn't really in tune compared to modern standards (i.e. closer to perfect intonation), even though most of the time the guitars were probably 'in tune', as in the open strings were correct.  It does really affect the feel, at least to me anyway.

Ah, got you.

Yes absolutely it does affect the feel. The frets of a guitar are tuned to 12-tet, whereas the strings are tuned to whatever your tuning system is (12-tet if you use a tuner; just if you use your ear, except for the G-B interval which is woefully wrong), and whichever tuning you use you're going to struggle with the 1st finger on the G string in E major. You can never get it perfect on a guitar. (Or any other instrument, but the guitar is horrendous). 

viz

octatonic said:

viz said:

As per my post above. I think this is for a piano tuned to quarter comma meantone in C. 


C Major
Completely Pure. Its character is: innocence, simplicity, naïvety, children's talk.

...

B Minor
This is as it were the key of patience, of calm awaiting ones's fate and of submission to divine dispensation.

LOL.
That is hilarious.

It is a tad outdated. 

guitarfishbay

The better my ear gets for pitch the more I hate guitars.


OT - 

I really want to try an evertune bridge to at least have the option to remove the link between dynamics and tuning. You can't pick a guitar hard without the attack going sharp relative to the decay, which is pretty limiting... it's also part of the sound of guitar, but I'd like to have the choice!

Jimbro66

octatonic said:
Most working musicians need to know this stuff and most musicians who are not guitarists learn it.
For some reason guitarists seem to think they are exempt.

Absolutely! Whoever penned the old joke "How do you silence a Lead Guitarist? - hand him some sheet music" was quite likely expressing frustration. Knowing your music theory means that, if nothing else, you can communicate with educated musicians - akin to speaking the same musical language. Maybe irrelevant in the pub-rock circuit but it gains importance for those wanting to be a rounded working guitarist.

Brad

Well, if you don't know your music theory how could you possibly have this much fun...

*WARNING what is once heard can not be unheard*

Rocker

Not really.  I know or think I know enough to get by.  Not sure if knowing would help/benefit me actually.

Clarky

Yes

a point to note…
theory is not a set of rules that confine your creativity..
it's simply a means to enable folks to describe what they are hearing
a technical language I guess..

it only becomes a set of hard and fast rules if you have to pass an exam in it..
or authentically compose a specific type of piece from a specific era [which can also be an exam task]

Gulliver

I hope so...

I mean, £14k in tuition fees and a piece of paper saying BMus(Hons)  hopefully means I have a decent grasp of it!!

stratman3142

Clarky said:

Yes

a point to note…
theory is not a set of rules that confine your creativity..
it's simply a means to enable folks to describe what they are hearing
a technical language I guess..

it only becomes a set of hard and fast rules if you have to pass an exam in it..
or authentically compose a specific type of piece from a specific era [which can also be an exam task]

I like that clear succinct description.

mellowsun

On a slightly tangental point, any tips for how to count quarter note triplets in the melody over quarter notes in the bass? So in a 1 bar phrase you are playing 6 notes on the top string with the ring finger and four notes on the lower strings with the thumb.

viz

mellowsun said:

On a slightly tangental point, any tips for how to count quarter note triplets in the melody over quarter notes in the bass? So in a 1 bar phrase you are playing 6 notes on the top string with the ring finger and four notes on the lower strings with the thumb.

Nice cup of tea, nice cup of tea?

stratman3142

mellowsun said:

On a slightly tangential point, any tips for how to count quarter note triplets in the melody over quarter notes in the bass? So in a 1 bar phrase you are playing 6 notes on the top string with the ring finger and four notes on the lower strings with the thumb.

I could count the quarter note triplets whilst tapping my foot on the beat. Then it would be a case of getting my thumb to follow my foot. But in truth I'd probably program it into Sibelius or Guitar Pro and hear what it sounds like, then copy that .