Reminder

snarky puppy sounds cool

I jerk off to Adam Neely vidoes

This nigger can't read music either, one of the best lead guitarists

Attached: 009.jpg (175x168, 5K)

okay kid

Attached: coltrane.jpg (978x973, 134K)

Theory is a useful tool, however academic music is trash

theory isnt really a useful tool for writing interesting popular music

BASED

I have said this before and I will say it again: you need both. you can't settle for only one
theory without soul is either overly intellectual or overly commercial. you can create the "perfect" song with theory, but it won't mean anything if you aren't putting any sort of emotion into it
soul without theory, however, never leads to a masterpiece. you can go a long way on just soul alone, just look at Neutral Milk Hotel. what you will never get, however, is complexity, and with it, the sublime
soul and theory together is when you get true musical art. there's a reason we regard most classical music as art. this combo can make you not only feel things, but feel them in entirely unique ways
when you search for perfection, you need EVERYTHING to be perfect. no exceptions. study theory, and play/write with emotion

Attached: 1556316052142.png (1000x1000, 264K)

Theory is better for analysis or maybe if you're a producer or arranger.

>classical music doesn't come from the soul
Fake fan detected.

Stevie Wonder is more firmly in the soul category than the theory though

newfag meme, like really, really new. "alpha" meme reskinned because zoomers have no memes that aren't products.

kurt cobain

he had both theory and soul, and that's why he's considered a classic

>Jimi and Kurt knew theory
>John is useless without Paul or his arranger with academic knowledge of theory
>Chad has never listened to a song in his life, it's literally in the first Chad comic ever made

>if you're a producer
aka musician

jimi and kurt did not know theory, you fucking retard

Not being able to read sheet music =/= not knowing theory, retard.

Everything I thought as a teenager is correct. Ten years have brought me full circle. You really are just jealous, because you see a thing that's new to you and you can't do it

cant do what? make wanky fusion only berklee ners listen to?

I don't care what it is, OP's the one that can't handle it

just because they didn't have formal education doesn't mean they didn't know theory, sorry to burst your bubble, brainlet. Jimi absolutely knew theory, he just didn't know music notation. Cobaine even had chord diagrams in his notebook

go ahead and write a good pop song without theory retard

this

Triggering the theorylets used to be the fun thing, but nowadays it's the other way around

I view the people that overdose on jazz theory like Collier to be like those people that take wayyy too much acid. just a little bit, and you can get cool insights, while making sure to develop your own structures of how you view music creation, while keeping it personal. too much, and you get to a place where you are making all these "extremely complex discoveries" and "push the bounds of music" with little practicality. make no mistake, the musicians on the right all studied music in their own way. their music didn't just come in a vacuum, they were influenced by a lot of acts before them

that's exactly what most great songwriters have done lmao

LMAO having chord diagrams is not knowing theory, literally every guitarists has probably looked at a chord diagram

>using this many words to express a shitty "no true scotsman" argument

if you can play an instrument you know at least some theory. Any musician that can play a chord or sing in tune saying they know nothing are either exaggerating or lying.

no they havent you imbecile, they all know theory even some of the industry plants. And the few who don't always get help from a producer or arranger who does

every guitarrist knows some theory, chord diagrams are literally theory, jesus christ this board is full of complete idiots

Why do people even like nirvana? Their music is fucking garbage.

chord diagrams are not theory, it's literally just where you place your fingers to make a sound. that does not imply you know what a chord even technically is or how it's derived.

You are a redditor visiting from indieheads

I disagree with the first part, there's not really such thing as too much theory. Just listen to Bach or some great jazz musicians who well about as well versed in theory as Collier. Jacob is just soulless, and I doubt he would've done anything good if he had less knowledge. You could understand all the techniques in painting, but if you're not creative/don't have anything to say you'll still end up with a very well polished piece of shit

>lead sheet music isn't theory, it's literally just where you place your fingers to make a sound
>scales aren't theory, it's literally just where you place your fingers to make a sound
>keys and functional harmony aren't theory, it's literally just where you place your fingers to make a sound
non-advanced theory is still theory en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chord_chart

you can know how to do something without knowing why it works. if i taught my cat to play a piano chord it wouldnt know theory.

>*blocks your path*
>never studied music theory
>writes "Here Comes Your Man" in his teens
nothin personel kid

Attached: frank black.jpg (263x300, 8K)

nice try but everyone in the Pixies knows theory, even the fucking drummer. Joey is very meticulous about his chord choices. Listen to the Pixies podcast. Anyone can write lyrics at 12. Charles recorded the song when he was an adult.

itt: soullets desperately name good artists that allegedly don't know theory, turns out they do

>old good new bad

>music.avclub.com/frank-black-1798210011
>FB: I'm an untrained musician. Untrained musicians don't really have any music theory, they don't have a lot of rules. We break the rules, but it's mostly because we don't know what the rules are. It's easy for us to go to certain places, so I'm not surprised that a lot of people were amused by my songwriting style. That's just the difference between two different kinds of writers or players. The Pixies were composed entirely of people like that. Except for the drummer, David Lovering, but I think that's kind of what gives us our sound too. He doesn't have a lot of quirk in his drumming style, which is great, because there's already enough quirk going on. [Laughs.] So that made it lock in a lot better. If we had a quirky drummer, it might have been blurrier, a lot messier, even more difficult to digest.

>willful ignorance = quirky
>quirky = good

Attached: 1562371318622.png (882x1252, 528K)

I agree but Adam Neely is a pretty cool and down to earth dude desu

>don't really have any music theory
he's lying, listen to the podcast from this year, where he describes his entire recording progress and it does involve theory. He's being like McCartney, and like some ignorant anons ITT, he thinks theory is knowing all the rules, they don't understand that the few rules that they DO know are still theory. Listen to Joey Santiago talk about his process too, I think it's in episode 7 of the podcast. Most rock musicians from the 90s love showing off how "regular dumb guy" they are, to the point that they dismiss their knowledge as "well i play but not really but yes but a little not really theory lol", even the really talented ones like Charles. Paz Lechantin, new member and not from the 90s, isn't afraid to admit she's a classically trained musician.

Music Theory was actually fairly underdeveloped in Mozarts time. Western Music Notation really exists because that was the only way to record music back then. The idea that Mozart went full autism with theory is a myth of modern academia. He literally fucking wrote canons about feces.

Attached: IMG_0305.jpg (420x566, 51K)

>Music Theory was actually fairly underdeveloped in Mozarts time
source: just trust me bro
>The idea that Mozart went full autism with theory
being trained since you were a kid isn't autism. No one is saying he went full autism.
>He literally fucking wrote canons about feces
this has absolutely zero relevance to your retarded "argument". Woah he was human and made jokes you guys, he was a "muh soul"tard just like me!!

The peak of music is improvising free time on a Hirajoshi scale using a Buchla Easel

Being trained from a young age to read sheet music and play an instrument is not the same as theory autism.

but no one who's studied music history has said theory went full theory autism. He did know more theory than your average musician today though. And he wasn't only trained to read and play. He was composing music when he was like 6 years old

>podcast

Attached: 1544657200004.gif (307x343, 22K)

>he thinks theory and soul are mutually exclusive
>i fell for the bait

john lennon the fucking chad

I don't think they had a list of set out rules that said what you could and couldn't do but I do know that you had to have a "good ear" to be able to dictate pieces of music to learn the "language" of music at the time for example. The idea of learning music theory didnt really exist back then- theory wasn't something separate you learned by itself - it was something that was embedded in learning "music" or learning "composition".

I think Mozart's works have a lot of soul. You can analyse Mozart's works theoretically, you can analyse the Beatle's music theoretically and you can analyse Jacob Collier's music theoretically. I think main difference between left and right is that both use compositional tools- the right use them to make music but the left use them to make a display of their tools.

I wanna learn keyboard.

>ur jaw is narrow and ur beard is thin

low IQ insults

My philosophy is quite simple: soul first, technique later, or 'Better to drink wine from the hands than water from a pretty cup'; of course the ultimate is wine from a pretty cup. Amen

Attached: robbiebasho290414w[1].jpg (604x388, 50K)

this

certain birds can mimick human speech but that doesn't mean they understand our language

if you're in this thread calling chord diagrams theory and acting like you know what you're talking about...

i guarantee you you don't play an instrument

>you can go a long way on just soul alone
>just look at Neutral Milk Hotel
So not a long way at all?

Did Mozart know music theory? Yes, and there is direct documentary evidence to prove it.

You need only accept that Fux's Gradus ad Parnassum -- an analysis of the compositional style of Palestrina, the “celebrated light of music” -- is a text on music theory. Following its publication in 1725, this Latin-language text-plus-workbook found its way into the hands of many of the most famous composers of the ensuing decades and centuries.

Haydn, for instance, taught himself from the Gradus; although Haydn's original copy with workbook answers was lost in World War II, copies of his handwritten marginal notes survive, along with a commentary on it that he wrote for his students. Beethoven too wrote an introduction to the text for the purpose of teaching his own pupils. Telemann, Chopin, Liszt, Schubert, and Brahms are also known to have owned a translation of the text; many other big names were taught using derivatives of Fux's work, though perhaps not provably from the pages of the Gradus.

As for Mozart: W. A. Mozart's father Leopold owned a copy of the Gradus. With it are a handwritten copy of the workbook exercises, thought to be those of either a young W. A. Mozart as a student or one of W. A. Mozart's own students. In addition, W. A. Mozart also wrote an adaptation of Fux's original text for teaching purposes.

So, to answer your question, yes. Being a teacher of music theory, Mozart was well versed in formal music theory. And it's preposterous to suggest otherwise. Without a knowledge of music theory, one can be a passable instrumentalist or, these days, a decent writer of popular music. But even a musical genius with great instinct cannot become a great composer, still celebrated two centuries afterwards, without understanding something of the theoretical underpinnings of the art.

People have been studying theory since at least the renaissance, why stop now?

Stevie Wonder has both

This is interesring- I didn't know about this. I think you'd be wrong to say that Mozart or Beethoven didn't write instinctually- otherwise they wouldnt have a creative musical voice i.e. that they didn't figure everything out mathematically and precisely from the "rules" of one book.

Also knowing "theory" doesn't necessarily have to mean being able to read music or knowing certain terminology. People like Lou Reed and John Lennon didn't know how to read music but were still able to make articulate decisions about what harmony to use, what rhythms to play, what metre to use, what tempo to play at, different textures to use, how to orchestrate different parts and so on. Different contexts and different perspectives...

>that they didn't figure everything out mathematically and precisely from the "rules" of one book
This seems to be a misconception for a lot of anti-theorh people. Theory isn't 'rules' it's literally just a way to talk about music and a way to classify things we hear. If we know how a minor plagal cadence sounds, when we hear one in our heads we immediately know what the chord sequence is. You don't have to call it a minor plagal cadence, but you might as well.

I'm not anti (formalist) theory- I actually think it's very useful in a lot of situations... but I don't think it's absolutely essential to write good music in every scenario. I still strongly disagree with
>even a musical genius with great instinct cannot become a great composer, still celebrated two centuries afterwards, without understanding something of the theoretical underpinnings of the art.

Thing is though music is patterns, and without actively trying to learn patterns you're not going to know how to interpret and repurpose them. Theory provides understanding of these patterns. I mean sure you can figure out the entire field of mechanical physics by yourself through happenstance but choosing to learn physics that way would be retarded and chances are high you'll still be an inferior physicist. That's why we have textbooks. To come to understanding of systems in a more efficient way so we could start applying our knowledge.

>Kurt Cobain
>good

Attached: 1568074639764.png (381x380, 200K)

this is true except, unlike physics, music is an art not a science

music is patterns. Patterns is math. Math is science. Value of music may be subjective, the observable peoperties of music sure as fuck aren't.

>plagal cadence
I recognize this user, you're a smart guy. Arguing in favor of educating yourself about theory, what a cool guy. You are the same guy who mentioned a plagal cadence in that other thread right?

I didn't mean analysing music is an art, I mean writing music is an art. Yes, Music is made up of patterns, but you don't necessarily need a book to tell you that

You learned counterpoint etc just like people do today, no idea what you're talking about

No but a book will teach you the patterns that make up the cultural product that is considered music. You can thrash around blindly on your guitar 'till you can play what resembles funk like a million monkeys on a typewriter or you can pick up a fucking book and learn exponentially faster.

seething

then how did The Beatles and Lou Reed learn to create music?

By studying how people who knew theory play. Do you think the knowledge of where fingers go to make chord came down to them from the heavens?

>50s rock n roll musicians knew music theory

Was OSRS music more soul or more theory?

Says mr “Chiny” chin chin

The Beatles? Trading songs around with their mates, practicing out songs by ear, buying chord books, playing hours and hours and hours of anything at all live. Just a relentless amount of practice.

This is evinced by even a cursory listen to their early live recordings

They have a lot of versions of Tin Pan Alley tunes. Notably Ain't She Sweet, which has a lot of the elements that show up later.

it's not a new wojak for once so it makes me cry with joy everytime I see it

This guy gets it. Remember when shiggy was a new thing?

academia is trash but occasionally it produces good music

no it wasn't, read even a modicum of literature you ape

that's a really retarded argument even if it sounded good in your head. You're comparing an experienced guitar player and musician to an animal that just mimics. Do birds understand how verbs work and how sentences are constructed? no. But even the rock band guitar player who plays dumb knows the basics of chord analysis and functional harmony, they know what a chord and what a scale is, they know how to jam in tune with other people. Whether they admit it or not, 99.99% of them didn't just come up with the concepts on their own.

>if I put my finger here it sounds good
>theory

Attached: 1375507776728.jpg (429x410, 55K)

go ahead, get a guitar and make an album with ZERO knowledge of theory, not even the basics of scales nor chords nothing, just putting your finger where it sounds good. Let's hear how great and soulful it sounds

I know jack shit about theory but I've made this.

onlinesequencer.net/213900

sounds soulless

Theory is what makes people listen to the first 30 seconds-2 minutes of your song, soul is what keeps them there for the next song/album.

>I know jack shit about theory
We can tell.

>equating memorizing a chord shape with theory

Attached: Nxddat6.jpg (1280x1450, 212K)

All musicians need soul and artistic creativity but not all artists need music theory. Simple as that.

it is literally part of theory you stubborn retard

Brian Wilson grew up knowing theory and he's better than John in every way imaginable.

>Implying he's better because he knew theory

Attached: 1439677164252.png (600x768, 591K)

record sales beg to differ sweetie

Imagine falling for a 50 year old propaganda.
John was the greatest pop songwriter of all time.

Just saying.

this. why is it so hard to understand?

>"We"

Yea you and your gang of fucking robots. "Beep boop beep boop play a C on the 3rd bar followed By a D sharp because theory"

Mozart was known for being experimental and making outrageous music that conflicted with the standards at the time.

They still understood rules. They just had great ear training from mindless hours of playing. Their music still falls within the rules of Western music and a lot of their cliche sounds can be analysed and given a formal application, i.e "hEnDRiX ChoRD" being a E7#9.
I agree that Collier, Neeley etc. make shit soulless trash, but that is due to their egoistic nature, and the need to regurgitate a lot of the largely useless functions they've learnt.

No it isn't. Understanding the intervals that construct the chord shape is theory, just knowing the shape is monkey see monkey do

Is this image implying that Stevie Wonder isn’t a good songwriter, while Kurt fucking Cobain is? Have you sub room temp IQ faggots even heard a Stevie song aside from Superstition playing at a gas station? I never reply to these threads, but unironically castrate yourselves, if you haven’t already.

Attached: 19A6B167-49D7-4BE1-9E9B-FB6ECDDDE2B1.jpg (1928x3849, 2.84M)

>onlinesequencer.net/213900
Thats actually quite good! One thing I'll say is that even when using synthsizers, you need to remember that every instrument has its own breath and gate, and some of those violin sections felt quite uneven. I'd tweak it around until it has more flow. Don't be afraid of longer notes and runs.

>castrate yourselves but unironically
this

Jimi is the only good artist in that image

Attached: 1565257787728.png (1200x1080, 1.02M)

>Understanding the intervals that construct the chord shape is theory
show me a good musician who doesn't understand this

you are peak fucking retarded
it's like talking with a bird

>of course the ultimate is wine from a pretty cup
Confirming you need both to be great, but yes soul takes precedence over technique. Basho had pretty great technique for what he wanted to do, forming a foundation over which he could express himself vocally and through his raga-like improvisations.

seethe harder you insecure "theory is not theory!!" failure of a faggot

This thread is fucking embarrasing and proves once and for all that Yea Forums knows absolutely nothing about music.

a musician understanding and utilizing theory is the same thing as an actor studying facial expressions and body language to better convey emotion. it enhances but if your movie was just a guy going through a bunch of different expressions and nothing else it'd be shit

Lennon did quite a lot of Proggy stuff in his later Beatles albums.

You've baited me by saying "good" musician, which is an objective term. As such I can't respond, but I'm willing to bet a lot of popular musicians like Dave Grohl, Josh Homme etc. can't name all the intervals and their locations in their chord shapes and riffs.

hey guys reading tabs is music theory :v)

Yeah sure man.

Attached: Franz Liszt.jpg (220x341, 22K)

>Okay user, we're gonna do 12 bar blues in C, then modulate to E flat for the chorus
>oh okay sure... uh... wait a minute... which strings are that?
>You're fucking fired

I have to believe the recent amount of butthurt over music theory is a bunch of musician-lets with inferiority complexes projecting the fact they cannot play an instrument.

Seriously there is zero rational reason to get mad at music theory.

based well written response

*fucks you in the ass*

Attached: steelydan.jpg (3000x1687, 1.52M)

thought he was holding a Monster Can at first

no one is actually mad but the theoryfags who dont realize theyre being baited. i mean it is hilarious that there are so many people who spend their time studying tons of theory when lots of untrained musicians have done far better with just intuition.

jUsT pLaY wHaT sOuNdS gOoD, yOu DoNt NeEd bLeEp bLoOp D MaJoR C MaJoR Bb MaJoR

How about no, you abject fucking retard.

okay but there are also hundreds upon hundreds of noteworthy musicians who DO know theory, so what’s your point

>more retards thinking theory is anything more than a tool of analysis rather than composition
We get it, you're too intellectually stunted and cowardly to actually make the effort to understand why certain things sound good, that's fine. But don't dump hendrix in the "soul" side just because he plays with apparent feeling, the dude had an innate understanding of theory. This arbitrary distinction is retarded and would be better served if you replaced soul with ear training, which is the actual way people learn how to write music.

This. Also, ear training (as in, learning a song by ear) involves naming intervals/chords. Back to square one.

or it involves placing fingers on frets
dear fuck, you are retarded

it's pretty obvious most celebrated songwriters rely on intuition for more than formal theory. look at any list of the greatest songwriters and most of the people on it will have no formal training. heoryfags usually become session musicians and producers.

I don't mean ear training in the specific sense of learning songs or recognising intervals, I mean your ability to audiate a piece of music in your head. You can thrash around without really internalising the nuances of the music, or you can rely entirely on the chart and never even need to hear the music at all. But neither of those approaches are hugely conducive to songwriting. What it takes is more visionary and inspired, you don't play around on a piano until something interesting happens, you can hear the idea fully formed in your head.

Good luck analyzing music with more complex harmony than major or minor chords, then. Clueless musicanlet, talking out of your ass.

we were talking about transcription, not analysis
you have to be shitting in my mouth if you're actually this stupid

It really depends on your definition of “greatest songwriters.” Does that list consist of pleb choices like John Lennon and Kurt Cobain? Then sure.

But what about Donald Fagen, or Chuck Schuldinger, or Miles Davis, or a whole laundry list of talented songwriters from different genres. Then your argument is fucked. (And yes I know that intuition plays a huge role, but it’s really a combination of theory knowledge and intuition)

>Does that list consist of pleb choices like John Lennon
He's definitely one of the greatest songwriters.

>transcription

Haha look at this fucking musicianlet, trying to use words he doesn’t even understand

Looks like you've finally given up.

Next brainlet in line, please.

You already revealed what an idiot you are when you said “just place your fingers on the guitar lmao”

For riffs that might work, not complex harmony

Anyone who argues is a automatic tryhard.

Attached: 1358719350313.jpg (500x500, 42K)

there's no objective way to evaluate songwriting ability, but it's undeniable that john lennon and kurt cobain were good at writing music that a large number of people enjoy. you can call it plebeian all you want, but if any schmo could do it, i think they would .

Nice argument

You just contradicted yourself. If there is no objective measure for good songwriting, then you can’t even claim “x and y musician are among the greatest songwriters.”

Bump

You can just say "read a book". You don't have to prove that you do lmao.

No he didn’t fuckhead, because he said that based on evidence it is clear that many people enjoy their music therefore they write music that many people enjoy. And if anyone could do this, anyone would, therefore this isn’t easy.

Learn some actual fucking mathematical logic before you try and argue you imbecile.

>Math is science
Bruh

Attached: kurt-gdel-3.jpg (900x750, 148K)

Based