An Engineer Looks at Melody

[fiziwig]

As strange as it may sound, I'm a little worried about learning theory. You know the story about the caterpillar who was walking along on his hundred little feet, minding his own business when someone stopped him and asked him how he knew which foot to pick up when. He thought about so hard he forgot how to walk.

It's like that with me and music. I can listen to a CD and sit down at the keyboard and just play along. My fingers seem to know of their own accord which notes to play and which chords will work. While writing a score if I think about the harmonies, instead of just letting my fingers play them on the keyboard by instinct, I get hopelessly lost. It would be fine if my brain knew something about harmony, but I don't want to let my brain make my fingers get confused.

--gary

[stevel]

Originally Posted by fiziwig

As strange as it may sound, I'm a little worried about learning theory. You know the story about the caterpillar who was walking along on his hundred little feet, minding his own business when someone stopped him and asked him how he knew which foot to pick up when. He thought about so hard he forgot how to walk.

It's like that with me and music. I can listen to a CD and sit down at the keyboard and just play along. My fingers seem to know of their own accord which notes to play and which chords will work. While writing a score if I think about the harmonies, instead of just letting my fingers play them on the keyboard by instinct, I get hopelessly lost. It would be fine if my brain knew something about harmony, but I don't want to let my brain make my fingers get confused.

--gary

Well then don't. You can make music without theory. All theory does is let you discuss music with other people who have learned the same theory.

But I have to tell you, it's so disappointing to read an article about a musician and they ask, so how do you come up with your chord progressions and all they can say is "they come to me". It makes young musicians fell that trying to attain any such level is hopeless. If you can say "I feel like I'm able to make my progressions fell like they're moving forward by what I call "compression" - which is my way of saying I like to have the chords sort of collapse in on themselves, like (example)." A young musician can use that concept of "compression" - even though not a standard theory term - and incorporate it into their own work.

If you can say "Oh, I used a lot of Minor Chromatic Mediants in that section" ,then others will know exactly what you're talking about - others that understand the language - and if they don't they'll be inspired to learn it. In my book, inspiring to learn is a whole lot more beneficial for humanity than not being able to explain yourself.

You just always have to temper what you learn.
Some things you learn you'll say - "oh, so that's what I've been doing".
Other things will be "oh, that sounds similar to what I've been doing, let's compare the two".
Other things will be "oh, I'll never use that - wait, maybe I will...later".
Other things will be "oh, that's how they got that sound".
Other things will be "oh, that's how I can explain that concept".
Other things will be "oh, what's the point".
Other things will be "oh, well they may have done it that way, and I'll do it that way to get an A on the test, but I do it this way when I do it".

And finally, things are simply observations. Rules are only good for an existing described style. People have even posted here "can I use Parallel 5ths". Well, if you wan't to sound like Bach, no, because he didn't. You also can't use a Blues Scale if you want to sound like Bach because he didn't use that either.

But if you want to write a "bluesy sounding" piece, and you have learned blues scales, then you don't need to noodle around on the keyboard until you find the right notes - you'll know which ones to play already.

Oh, and by the way. You already have learned theory! If you play anything, and can think about what you're doing, you're using some type of theory - remember, music theory is not like other sciences - it's more of a description of what's going on. If you can write out a score that describes what you're doing, or name pitches and chords, you're already using some aspects of theory. In fact, you could say that learning Piano (or whatever) has already boxed you in to thinking in a 12 note style. What about violin where you can play quarter tones? So everything restrictive on some level. You just need to see past the restrictions - use them when appropriate, and dump them when appropriate.

Steve

[fiziwig]

Steve,

Thank you very much for that thoughtful reply. There's a lot of food for thought in there. I suppose at some level I've "internalized" theory, without really putting a verbal handle on that understanding. It would be nice to be able to talk about what I do, and learn by listening to others talk about what they do. What I DO have is stacks and stacks of orchestral scores. When I put on a CD of Stravinsky, say, for some serious listening, I also pull the score and read along. What I've learned about orchestration I've learned by reading scores from Mozart to Faure and everything between.

For example, I was listening to (and reading) Poulenc's organ concerto about a week ago and I thought, wow, I could build a neat little "chase scene" on the viola line in the vicinity of measure 221, so I lifted one measure of the viola part only and built a whole chase scene piece around that one measure. http://www.fiziwig.com/mp3/chase.mp3 (Another forum was having an informal contest to write a chase scene)

Now I don't have a name for what it was I copied, but now I know how to use it, modify it, build from it. But I admit it would be nice to be able to name it (and understand it) as well.

--gary

[reith]

Originally Posted by fiziwig

Steve,
I suppose at some level I've "internalized" theory, without really putting a verbal handle on that understanding..........What I've learned about orchestration I've learned by reading scores from Mozart to Faure and everything between.......
--gary

I think that's how it should be. Barely different from speech and writing. It comes naturally without having to think of the parts of speech, whether to use the subjunctive mood or should this pronoun be personal or impersonal...etc. . .One's speech (mine anyway) doesn't always conform to 'the proper' but the importance is whether the idea is conveyed. There are people who want to study the technical details of course, but many great novels have been written by authors using only the grammar they learned at school. And many great musical works composed with just a good sense of music which is probably "internalised theory" as much as intuition.

reith

[stevel]

Originally Posted by reith

I think that's how it should be. Barely different from speech and writing. It comes naturally without having to think of the parts of speech, whether to use the subjunctive mood or should this pronoun be personal or impersonal...etc. . .One's speech (mine anyway) doesn't always conform to 'the proper' but the importance is whether the idea is conveyed. There are people who want to study the technical details of course, but many great novels have been written by authors using only the grammar they learned at school. And many great musical works composed with just a good sense of music which is probably "internalised theory" as much as intuition.

reith

I agree - remember, Beethoven didn't study Theory textbooks - he studied the music - or more likely, internalized the music of those before him, and came up with his own take on it. So you're doing the right thing. So while theory has its advantages, it also has its "understoods" - things we've all learned "innately" (that's why I said you already do know some!). So if you go take some courses, remember that they're not trying to "force you" to think a particular way - they're trying to show you how many people think and how they communicate those thoughts, and hopefully, why they think it's important to describe communicate those thoughts. They're not trying to force you into some box of X thinking. But when you take a course, the practical nature of instructing the course requires it not to be a free-for-all, but to focus on some logically built sytem that can be taught, retained, graded, discussed, etc.

Best,
Steve