They didn't know music theory

>They didn't know music theory
>Yet wrote complex songs
So are people born into being genius songwriters?

Attached: 1565291522217.png (1125x1126, 2.48M)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/PMMe3iwBV-I
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

There's nothing complex about the Beatles music. Listen to more than 20 albums.

No they just met Geroge Martin and were able to get passed copying chuck berry with a puppet master aiding them

Knowing music theory stifles creativity.

Ignorant.

>>They didn't know music theory
They did.
>>Yet wrote complex songs
They didn't.
Meme.

Music theory lets you have a decent understanding of what you're doing and can give you more ideas for when you're in a rut. People who insist it's actively bad to know this are just intimidated by the idea of practicing. Theory itself is neutral, it exists in every musician with or without their knowledge. It's like math. And it's rarely only the chord progression and it's not just knowing your major and minor scales and you're done for life. It's a lot of elements at once. It's the gesture. It's the arrangement. It's the development. It's the form, the structure. It's the way the harmony and melody come together. It's the choice of instruments. It's the lyrics, even, and the rhythm, tone, texture and colour. It allows you to reverse engineer things, which is a very useful skill to have. The only way to break the rules knowingly and accordingly is to know all the rules first. This has been proven time and time again by classical composers who analysed works of their predecessors and most of them have been a part of institutionalised education.

The idea that theory could be a negative knowledge comes from a bullshit romantic notion that good art is purely unconscious or emotional and that systematization and logic are antithetical to it. Intuition alone could never result in the monstrous feat of borderline engineering that is a great symphony.

The theories of psychoacoustics, biomusicology and so on indicate that there are certain musical and sound qualities we find pleasing regardless of cultural bias. A trained musician would be much more familiar with these and thus able to subvert and play with them. There's a reason classical music is much, much more interesting than the various folk musics of the world.

inb4
>Theory is useless.
So you basically reinvent an inferior version of the wheel via years of trial and error, and that's somehow better than just learning how to use a wheel?

>pop song that uses modal harmony in 1966 isn't complex
go back to radiohead

Attached: DW_GUpoVoAA1JNl.jpg (708x800, 64K)

>>pop song that uses modal harmony in 1966 isn't complex
Exactly, you fucking retard. Modes have been used since the fucking medieval ages.

>if it’s medieval, it can’t be complex
Build something like this, please. It will be very easy

Attached: 362C9BAB-370E-45A9-B304-CD61F4A43BDB.jpg (480x640, 178K)

Lennon was the only real musician in that band.

It's still a pop song. It's still using the basic structure their other music uses. Nice wojak and boogeyman though, retard.

I've seen this pasta hundreds of time at this point and I've a nagging feeling I wrote it.

>>if it’s medieval, it can’t be complex
Never implied that. You really do have no reading comprehension at all.

You spelled Harrison wrong

>Exactly, you fucking retard. Modes have been used since the fucking medieval ages.
>It's still using the basic structure their other music uses
this can't be real

Attached: 1556063303929.png (247x248, 99K)

based

>Never implied that
Yes you did

What? Keep in mind you're replying to two different anons.

You're almost as big a clown as OP.

No, I really didn't. It's implied that if something has been going on for half a millennia, then there's far more complex things in existence. Using something that has been explored, perfected and used a million times in sacred, traditional/folk and art musics, in 1966 and calling it "complex" just because pop music is usually simplistic kindergarten garbage, doesn't make the music complex and it sure as hell doesn't prove that it's impressive just because they didn't know music theory which is also incorrect because they obviously did.

>clown
Epic twitter meme.

Literally just called you clown, clown.

Why do people larp like they known anything about music?
If you actually studied music. You’d know The Beatles were real shit. But I can assume you’ve never picked an instrument in your life.

I don't use twitter, you child.

You have no argument.

@89756934
I literally study music and play several instruments, you gargantuan fucking cretin. Not even going to grace you with attention i.e. with a (You) that you apparently crave for so much. Read a fucking book. Bye, faggot.

Epic clown theme starts playing

Non musicians seething.

Literally no argument.

I play several instruments.

Translation:
>I own several instruments
>I haven’t mastered a single instrument. Instead, saying i play several makes me sound more cool and professional
What did I expect from people who can’t see the complexity of The Beatles. Like I’m suppose to listen to you guys instead of Can or King Crimson.

>They were the worst musicians in the world. They were no-playing motherfuckers. Paul was the worst bass player I ever heard. And Ringo? Don’t even talk about it. I remember once we were in the studio with George Martin, and Ringo had taken three hours for a four-bar thing he was trying to fix on a song. He couldn’t get it. We said, “Mate, why don’t you get some lager and lime, some shepherd’s pie, and take an hour-and-a-half and relax a little bit.” So he did, and we called Ronnie Verrell, a jazz drummer. Ronnie came in for 15 minutes and tore it up. Ringo comes back and says, “George, can you play it back for me one more time?” So George did, and Ringo says, “That didn’t sound so bad.” And I said, “Yeah, motherfucker because it ain’t you.”

Attached: BF4415D5-FC9C-4A7B-9C4D-A24111140936.jpg (570x712, 102K)

It's hilarious when people defend Paul's shitty music when even the other Beatles thought it was trite shit. Just show what shitmunching plebs they are.

Why did he shit on every Beatle but John?

Because best beatle.

niggers shouldn't be allowed to have opinions on white music, considering how we aren't allowed to have opinions on their music aside from nodding our heads in shame every time they bitch about da poleez n raysism.

Great "opinion." You can fuck off now.

He's the Beatle with least technical knowledge, meaning that he relies on pure creativity and talent. He's lucky, though, because he was the Beatle with most talent. If you can't deduce I Feel Fine's riff or I Am The Walrus' chord progressions through technical construction, the only thing that rests to you is wish that they come magically on your mind. That's exactly what used to happen with Lennon.

triggered fag liberal.

there's no way he knows less than starr lol

Is this your first day online?

Ringo was incredibly competent. He never fucked up one single session, and he was a great drummer (i.e Rain, She Said She Said). Lennon was competent with the rhythm guitar, but nothing special. He was talented with the harmonica though. It's a shame that he played it so few times.

He never said that. But it's always parroted.
Paul and Quincy have both commented on this.

>He was talented with the harmonica though
t. has never listened to any blues in his entire life

Why do you say that?

>Real shit
Do you mean they're the real good shit, or they're actually shit?

They're actually shit.

Real shit = good

>Jones also claimed to know the identity of JFK’s killer (Chicago mobster Sam Giancana: “We shouldn’t talk about this publicly”) and to have briefly dated Ivanka Trump 12 years ago: “She had the most beautiful legs I ever saw in my life. Wrong father, though!” Later in the interview, Jones called Trump senior “a fucking idiot”.

in the same article. the guy is a blabbering coke addict desperate for past glory.

Beatles only appeal to children and those with the mental capacity of children. That's why their fans are so obnoxious and ignorant.

So classical and jazz composers are ignorant children?

what is it about the beatles and theoryfags that produce unbridled hatred and searing autism

t. non musician

Objectively wrong.
>theoryfags
You mean people who actually know about music don't like shitty pop bands being constantly hailed as the best band ever by ignorant teens like yourself?

Name 1 (one) classical composer that listened to the Beatles lmao

>Objectively wrong
Either you're a musician or you shit on the Beatles:
youtu.be/PMMe3iwBV-I
Learn theory, fool.
youtu.be/PMMe3iwBV-I

>why are people who know stuff upset about people who don't know that stuff and who are spouting nonsense
Gee I wonder

You've proven nothing, other than how foolish you are.

They were recognized as being deep by the Times of London as long ago as 1963. Actually do some research instead of farting out nonsense.

>Learn theory, fool

I'm still confused

>They were recognized as being deep by the Times of London as long ago as 1963.
And if your mother calls you a special boy you better believe it as well, right?

The modern media consistently calls Kanye West and Beyonce revolutionary and inspirational artists, hailing their works as among the greatest of all time. Does this make it true?

>The modern media consistently calls Kanye West and Beyonce revolutionary and inspirational artists, hailing their works as among the greatest of all time
Source: my ass

Beyonce no.
Kanye yes.

Based Bernstein praising The Beatles. It's really obvious when you know theory.

>Bernstein
>classical composer
Stretching it a bit but alright. Now name 1 (one) GOOD classical composer that listened to The Beatles.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-08-26 Lemonade by Beyoncé.png (395x282, 48K)

>It's really obvious when you know theory.
No, it's really obvious when everything you've ever heard is pop music.

right on cue
for the record I actually kind of agree with you
but you're such fucking assholes about it
would it kill you to be nicer

I don't think Bernstein only listened to pop music, kek. Nice try, though

On Yea Forums. Being an asshole is a method used by people who don’t know what they’re talking about.

You didn’t, cause I did

>>>r/music

Modal harmony isn’t complex. It’s just another set of pitches.

Ah yes that hack Bernstein, famous for having only listened to pop music. Whenever he conducted Mahler he'd actually have earphones on with Beach Boys playing! What a faggot

That's not complex at all compared to contemporary architecture. It just has lots of stone carvings on it.

You're the one using a conductor as an example of a composer because you don't even know the difference. Bernstein never composed anything of note.

>implying good composers post 60s
Found your problem

Who the hell called him a composer here? I must've missed it

>Hey, this dude studies and plays classical music and he likes the bea-
>NOOOO NOT COMPOSER UGHHHHHHHHH

>modern music man bad
Oh what a daring statement

>Bernstein
>not a composer
God you're absolutely clueless

Not the user you are replying to, but he's not a classical composer because that's what I asked for in the first place.

>he's not a classical composer
How so?

>American
>musicals
>jazz
It's really stretching the definition if you count him to be honest.

I'm sure you could find some random jackass who studies classical music that listens to horrible rap music as well. Does that make it good?

Only if you're shallow enough to think music theory is a replacement for creativity, which unsurprisingly describes a lot of theoryfags on this board.

>Bernstein only wrote musical and jazz pieces
No.

>They didn't know music theory
Paul did, and he wrote most of the hits. He wasn't an expert but he definitely knew. Then there's that 5th beatle, their arranger, who was a classically trained musician

>Paul did
He didn't. He already said that.

It doesn't matter what he says. It's a prerequisite to make music that you know some music theory and even if you think you don't know any kind of terminology or theory, you still know some of it subconsciously because of the one fact that you've probably listened to a lot of music.

>the only way to break the rules knowingly is to know them
HOLY SHIT REALLY?

Attached: brainlet.png (645x729, 113K)

>It's a prerequisite to make music that you know some music theory and even if you think you don't know any kind of terminology or theory, you still know some of it subconsciously because of the one fact that you've probably listened to a lot of music.
Then by this logic every Beatle knew theory. Why the fuck did you say only Paul?

Yes, something you need to hear some simple kindergarten shit to understand it, capiche?

He’s literally citing our chords in a lot of The Beatles outtakes.

I'm not the user you responded to. And I think they all did, yes.

>Legendary musician Paul McCartney sat down with 60 Minutes correspondent Sharyn Alfonsi for an in-depth chat about his new album, Egypt Station, and he revealed something rather contradictory: he is unable to read or write music, and neither could any of his Beatles bandmates.

None of the Beatles music is complex.

If the beatles didn't know theory they wouldn't have had chords in their songs, their songs would've had the complexity of gregorian chants. western music is a system that was INVENTED, not a system that is inherent or universal. even our note names are not shared by other cultures that create their own music.

every musician knows theory, paul knew the notes of the piano and where middle C is, what an octave is, what a chord is. that is all theory that has been invented and established in western culture exclusively. when they say they don't know theory, they don't know theory in the way they see people who "know theory" know theory, which is an incredibly subjective definition of an actually general and broad term. anyway, they knew theory just in an applicable sense. same way a civil engineer knows math in an applicable sense, but maybe doesn't explore it in an abstract way that separates it as its own respective field.

Usually means can't read or write classical notation. I'm pretty sure he knows the notes on his guitar

Dumbest post of all time.

>I'm pretty sure he knows the notes on his guitar
Yes. That's not knowing music theory, though.

It literally is though

Not really. This knowledge is a SINGLE element on the rudiments of music theory. Key and time signatures, aswell as tonality and rhythmic notations are separated elements that, together, construct the base of music theory.

You're literally fucking retarded, user is right in every way.

So you don't think the Beatles knew anything about key or time?

You cannot study key and time signatures, along with tonality construction without knowing how to fucking read music.

You literally can though lmao just fucking listen to the chords or count the time what the fuck

>PLAYBOY: "Wasn't alot of the Beatles' music at least more intelligent?"
>LENNON: "The Beatles were more intellectual, so they appealed on that level, too. But the basic appeal of the Beatles was not their intelligence. It was their music. It was only after some guy in the 'London Times' said there were Aeolian cadences in 'It Won't Be Long' that the middle classes started listening to it... because somebody put a tag on it."
>PLAYBOY: "Did you put Aeolian cadences in 'It Won't Be Long?'"
>LENNON: "To this day, I don't have any idea what they are. They sound like exotic birds."

Attached: times-what-songs-beatles-sang-william-mann.jpg (403x900, 99K)

see

>You cannot study key and time signatures
Of course not. But as a musician you pick up on these things while playing. If you'd actually spent much time playing music you'd know that. Sitting and reading about music from a book is not the only way people learn "music theory."

based lenno