The Most Complex theory concept you've learned.

[ExSaint1379]

I'm really curious about this due to the nature of this forum. Mostly rock and pop musicians and I'm just curious to where everyone is in theory. Not that it matters in anyway. I think great music has been written by people with no theory backround and alot of the worst music ever was written by people who knew more about music theory than everyone else (probaly combined), and of course there are people with no theory backround that have written horrible music and people who knew alot about theory who have written great music. It really has no effect on anything... I just think it's helpful in certain instances, but most of the music I write, I do it by "remembering a tune that hasn't been written" (in the words of Robert Schumann).

[sparqee]

I was a Composition major in college. While there I did some work that involved poly-rhythms and non standard scales. Those were some weird tunes. I liked the poly-rhythms but I must confess my taste runs towards 12 tones scales. <shrug> Now days my stuff is pretty standard pop/rock stuff. I occasionally write things in odd meters but not because I set out to do that. I'm just noodling around and it comes out. I then have to sit down and figure out what's going on in the music. I must confess I've gotten quite rusty at standard notation and "thinking" about "theory". I mostly stay in the intuitive region of my experience and delve into the "intellectual" only when I'm curious or want to put a name to something interesting that I've done.

I'm still working on getting to be more intuitive with my recording/mixing. There's still a lot of "thinking" that goes on while I'm arranging & mixing. I suppose mixing will always be more of an intellectual process than composing (for me) but I do know that my use of EQ & compression has gotten far less "formula" and for more "it feels right" in the last couple of years.

[Whammo]

If you're interested in some complex theory, look into Pythagoras and the mathematical relationship of musical notes.
This pretty much explains why we have the diatonic scale and why harmony works.
Then you can go on to tempered scales and find out why things need to be slightly out of tune so that we can play in any key nearly in tune.

[ExSaint1379]

Originally Posted by Whammo

If you're interested in some complex theory, look into Pythagoras and the mathematical relationship of musical notes.
This pretty much explains why we have the diatonic scale and why harmony works.
Then you can go on to tempered scales and find out why things need to be slightly out of tune so that we can play in any key nearly in tune.

Ahhh yeah the overtone system is. I know all about temperment. I was curious about what people on this forum knew.

[ExSaint1379]

Originally Posted by sparqee

I was a Composition major in college. While there I did some work that involved poly-rhythms and non standard scales. Those were some weird tunes. I liked the poly-rhythms but I must confess my taste runs towards 12 tones scales. <shrug> Now days my stuff is pretty standard pop/rock stuff. I occasionally write things in odd meters but not because I set out to do that. I'm just noodling around and it comes out. I then have to sit down and figure out what's going on in the music. I must confess I've gotten quite rusty at standard notation and "thinking" about "theory". I mostly stay in the intuitive region of my experience and delve into the "intellectual" only when I'm curious or want to put a name to something interesting that I've done.

12 tone rows? Yeah always been interesting to me. You should use that system some time in pop and rock music. You can create not atonal sounding music with it (like Alban Berg).

[sparqee]

This forum does seem to be populated by quite a few musicians. Many of the recording forums seem to be predominantly populated by audio engineers rather than "recording musicians" and it's fun kicking around recording issues from a musical point of view rather than just a "sound quality" point of view. You'll find both here I think. It's a real right brain + left brain kind'a crowd.

[engelbach]

Originally Posted by sparqee

This forum does seem to be populated by quite a few musicians.

Not surprising. It's the Home Recording Forum, so I assume many if not most people here are intereted in recording themselves.

There's theory, and then there's THEORY. If you want to be a pilot you have to know how aerodynamic forces act on an airplane's control surfaces, but you don't have to know the math.

I don't know much about Pythagoras (except a2 + b2 = c2), but I have to know how to construct a logical harmonic progression to fit under an original melody, and how to create a melodic solo over an existing harmony.

In other words, I don't know (and don't have much interest in) the math, or why something sounds good. I just know how to make music that works, having learned from what other people have done.

Theory is the adoption as standard practice of what came before. Anybody who plays a chord that anybody else has played is using music theory.

[Cailyn]

Originally Posted by engelbach

Anybody who plays a chord that anybody else has played is using music theory.

I agree. We all know varying degrees of theory. We may not know what it's called, but the mere act of listening should be expanding the knowledge of theory. I looked for a quick definition of music theory and came up with this:

"Music theory is the field of study that deals with the mechanics of music and how music works. It involves identifying patterns that govern composers' techniques. In a more general sense, music theory also often distills and analyzes the elements of music – rhythm, harmony (harmonic function), melody, structure, form, and texture."

If you play an instrument or compose, then you have some understanding of theory. Clearly, the theory behind most pop music is simple. Nevertheless, it is not a simple thing to write a good pop song.

I've listened to classical music most of my life and have a good understanding of the compositional theory that underlies symphonies and other complex pieces. I'm not entirely sure that improves my enjoyment of the music. I may admire the skill of the composer, nevertheless, you can know no theory and still enjoy classical music. I'm not sure it provides much advantage in writing rock music either.

[ExSaint1379]

Originally Posted by Cailyn

I've listened to classical music most of my life and have a good understanding of the compositional theory that underlies symphonies and other complex pieces. I'm not entirely sure that improves my enjoyment of the music. I may admire the skill of the composer, nevertheless, you can know no theory and still enjoy classical music..

This seems like a relatively rare opinion with other students and teachers of music. There are pieces that an understanding of what the composer is doing takes away from the music like very often Mozart (like in so many of his pieces... he is as tonally boring as rock music). And when you do find the cool things he does with structure or counterpoint, they are cool, but not necessary to love the music. This is the case for most musicians until about 1900. There are so many Bartok pieces that I couldn't even hear correctly until I understood what he was doing. I mean I thought it was just noise, but for some reason when I know what he's doing, it stops being noise and becomes really beautiful. There are a few composers like that. Still learning the 12 tone system does not make me enjoy Schoenberg at all. I still can't stand it and don't think I ever will be able to.

[Chazamatazz]

The most complex thing to me is that the ear can only discern one thing at a time. Call me pretentious if you will, this is honestly what I said.