Daft assumptions you've had for years about guitars/bass/gear ?

thegummy

AlexC said:

I used to admire people - many years ago - who knew the name of everything. Now I realise it's not hugely important. Turns out half the time I'm playing mixolydian or dorian or whatver the hell - am I? Just notes. If it sounds right to me then it's right to me. Had a drummer once and he said 'you realise went into 5/4 there?' And the rest of us said 'did we?' So it's all intuition for me. I'm not degrading theory, but the flipsideis I've met people who know every bit of theory under the sun and can't play for toffee.

In my 20s I was under the populay myth that some love to propagate that if you play rock and pop that you're not 'good enough' to play Jazz. That you have to go on some magical Jazz journey from the age of three... Had a good friend who was a great Jazz player and I realised it's just a different approach and technique. By my late 20s I was playing an acoustic in a performing Jazz band. It's all chords and notes. Same as all music. I detest musical snobbery.

The real purpose of music theory is to analyse music that already exists and have an academic language to explain what makes it sound good.

It's certainly true that much of the great music of the world was written by people who just instinctively felt the music and didn't work it out based on knowledge of music theory.

It's debatable that having such knowledge might help someone write music, while some feel it actually hinders the ability. But it's definitely not necessary in order to write music.

Neill

thegummy said:

AlexC said:

I used to admire people - many years ago - who knew the name of everything. Now I realise it's not hugely important. Turns out half the time I'm playing mixolydian or dorian or whatver the hell - am I? Just notes. If it sounds right to me then it's right to me. Had a drummer once and he said 'you realise went into 5/4 there?' And the rest of us said 'did we?' So it's all intuition for me. I'm not degrading theory, but the flipsideis I've met people who know every bit of theory under the sun and can't play for toffee.

In my 20s I was under the populay myth that some love to propagate that if you play rock and pop that you're not 'good enough' to play Jazz. That you have to go on some magical Jazz journey from the age of three... Had a good friend who was a great Jazz player and I realised it's just a different approach and technique. By my late 20s I was playing an acoustic in a performing Jazz band. It's all chords and notes. Same as all music. I detest musical snobbery.

The real purpose of music theory is to analyse music that already exists and have an academic language to explain what makes it sound good.

It's certainly true that much of the great music of the world was written by people who just instinctively felt the music and didn't work it out based on knowledge of music theory.

It's debatable that having such knowledge might help someone write music, while some feel it actually hinders the ability. But it's definitely not necessary in order to write music.

Yes, I find it fascinating when an expert analyses a song and explains why it has the effect it does, but I often ask myself yes but is that how the writer composed it?  I was listening to an in depth examination of "Life on Mars" the other day, and from a retrospective music theory viewpoint there's all sorts going on, but I wonder how much of it contributed to Bowie's thought process when he wrote the song.  I know he was technically very gifted but I still think that sort of quality comes from something within that goes beyond theoretical knowledge. 

mudslide73

Neill said:

thegummy said:

AlexC said:

I used to admire people - many years ago - who knew the name of everything. Now I realise it's not hugely important. Turns out half the time I'm playing mixolydian or dorian or whatver the hell - am I? Just notes. If it sounds right to me then it's right to me. Had a drummer once and he said 'you realise went into 5/4 there?' And the rest of us said 'did we?' So it's all intuition for me. I'm not degrading theory, but the flipsideis I've met people who know every bit of theory under the sun and can't play for toffee.

In my 20s I was under the populay myth that some love to propagate that if you play rock and pop that you're not 'good enough' to play Jazz. That you have to go on some magical Jazz journey from the age of three... Had a good friend who was a great Jazz player and I realised it's just a different approach and technique. By my late 20s I was playing an acoustic in a performing Jazz band. It's all chords and notes. Same as all music. I detest musical snobbery.

The real purpose of music theory is to analyse music that already exists and have an academic language to explain what makes it sound good.

It's certainly true that much of the great music of the world was written by people who just instinctively felt the music and didn't work it out based on knowledge of music theory.

It's debatable that having such knowledge might help someone write music, while some feel it actually hinders the ability. But it's definitely not necessary in order to write music.

Yes, I find it fascinating when an expert analyses a song and explains why it has the effect it does, but I often ask myself yes but is that how the writer composed it?  I was listening to an in depth examination of "Life on Mars" the other day, and from a retrospective music theory viewpoint there's all sorts going on, but I wonder how much of it contributed to Bowie's thought process when he wrote the song.  I know he was technically very gifted but I still think that sort of quality comes from something within that goes beyond theoretical knowledge. 

I used to play with a bassist that didn't know what keys were. He'd listen to most pieces once and then play them. He didn't really know about note names either. He was a big Rush fan and had figured out lots of their stuff on bass just by listening to it. 

Neill

mudslide73 said:

Neill said:

thegummy said:

AlexC said:

I used to admire people - many years ago - who knew the name of everything. Now I realise it's not hugely important. Turns out half the time I'm playing mixolydian or dorian or whatver the hell - am I? Just notes. If it sounds right to me then it's right to me. Had a drummer once and he said 'you realise went into 5/4 there?' And the rest of us said 'did we?' So it's all intuition for me. I'm not degrading theory, but the flipsideis I've met people who know every bit of theory under the sun and can't play for toffee.

In my 20s I was under the populay myth that some love to propagate that if you play rock and pop that you're not 'good enough' to play Jazz. That you have to go on some magical Jazz journey from the age of three... Had a good friend who was a great Jazz player and I realised it's just a different approach and technique. By my late 20s I was playing an acoustic in a performing Jazz band. It's all chords and notes. Same as all music. I detest musical snobbery.

The real purpose of music theory is to analyse music that already exists and have an academic language to explain what makes it sound good.

It's certainly true that much of the great music of the world was written by people who just instinctively felt the music and didn't work it out based on knowledge of music theory.

It's debatable that having such knowledge might help someone write music, while some feel it actually hinders the ability. But it's definitely not necessary in order to write music.

Yes, I find it fascinating when an expert analyses a song and explains why it has the effect it does, but I often ask myself yes but is that how the writer composed it?  I was listening to an in depth examination of "Life on Mars" the other day, and from a retrospective music theory viewpoint there's all sorts going on, but I wonder how much of it contributed to Bowie's thought process when he wrote the song.  I know he was technically very gifted but I still think that sort of quality comes from something within that goes beyond theoretical knowledge. 

I used to play with a bassist that didn't know what keys were. He'd listen to most pieces once and then play them. He didn't really know about note names either. He was a big Rush fan and had figured out lots of their stuff on bass just by listening to it. 

Ha ha, I used to tell the audience ( if we had one) that a "key" meant that possibly one, or more, of us could be playing, or singing the song, totally different from the rest.

thegummy

mudslide73 said:

I used to play with a bassist that didn't know what keys were. He'd listen to most pieces once and then play them. He didn't really know about note names either. He was a big Rush fan and had figured out lots of their stuff on bass just by listening to it. 

I'd play with him over someone who'd learned music theory academically every time.

mudslide73

thegummy said:

mudslide73 said:

I used to play with a bassist that didn't know what keys were. He'd listen to most pieces once and then play them. He didn't really know about note names either. He was a big Rush fan and had figured out lots of their stuff on bass just by listening to it. 

I'd play with him over someone who'd learned music theory academically every time.

His main problems were that he couldn't understand modular parts of cover songs so couldn't deviate from a record in any way... he was like a human sampler!  He would also take 40+ weeks as holiday due to having a place in Cornwall. This meant we had to get our diaries out to schedule rehearsals. Cracking bloke though.

thegummy

mudslide73 said:

thegummy said:

mudslide73 said:

I used to play with a bassist that didn't know what keys were. He'd listen to most pieces once and then play them. He didn't really know about note names either. He was a big Rush fan and had figured out lots of their stuff on bass just by listening to it. 

I'd play with him over someone who'd learned music theory academically every time.

His main problems were that he couldn't understand modular parts of cover songs so couldn't deviate from a record in any way... he was like a human sampler!  He would also take 40+ weeks as holiday due to having a place in Cornwall. This meant we had to get our diaries out to schedule rehearsals. Cracking bloke though.

Lol well I just meant someone with that talent, maybe not the specific guy :P 

Surprised about the modular parts of cover songs issue, couldn't he just learn it from the rest of you just like he learned things from records?

mudslide73

thegummy said:

mudslide73 said:

thegummy said:

mudslide73 said:

I used to play with a bassist that didn't know what keys were. He'd listen to most pieces once and then play them. He didn't really know about note names either. He was a big Rush fan and had figured out lots of their stuff on bass just by listening to it. 

I'd play with him over someone who'd learned music theory academically every time.

His main problems were that he couldn't understand modular parts of cover songs so couldn't deviate from a record in any way... he was like a human sampler!  He would also take 40+ weeks as holiday due to having a place in Cornwall. This meant we had to get our diaries out to schedule rehearsals. Cracking bloke though.

Lol well I just meant someone with that talent, maybe not the specific guy :P 

Surprised about the modular parts of cover songs issue, couldn't he just learn it from the rest of you just like he learned things from records?

He could learn things from us but couldn't react to a situation and fill in. If something had 4 repetitions he couldn't add a fifth if his life depended on it. I know you're supposed to stick to the arrangement but he wouldn't deviate from it in any way - even if we'd pre agreed it. Incredible talent though - easily the best bassist I've played with. It just came with a lot of conditions.