Vocal Editing and such

[grimtraveller]

I'm not sure where the whole thing that music theory is a heavy bummer came from.

Well, firstly, I don't think the problem is as much with theory as it is with certain theorists. Theory in itself is inanimate, it's people that put life and judgements behind things. Many, certainly not all, exponents of music theory simply look down on music that does not fit what they believe to be within the bounds of what they know and the musicians that play that music. And it's simply not true to say that the "music theory is a bummer" thing came from the 70s and punk. It had existed in varying fits and starts, long before that. Self taught and untutored blues musicians (before electric guitar and R&B) discarded theory in many instances. Skiffle in the 50s took off big time in the UK because theory as defined by theorists and many classically trained, was deemed as unnecessary to make music and have fun. Part of the reason why the Beatles were initially simultaneously lauded and loathed by the middle and upper classes is because they seemed to flout the musical theory that many were stuck in - yet, they sounded so good.
For me one of the fascinating things about rock in the 60s was that for possibly the first time in living memory, you had theorists and 'primitives' coming together in bands and studios and publishing companies and they drew from each other. Theorists like John Entwistle, Jack Bruce, Jon Lord and lots of others came together with instinctive self taught guys that had learned from playing along to records. The theory cats learned to let go and loosen up a bit, the self taught often learned some theory !
Truth be told, I've noticed elitist snobbery on both sides. I think alot of people, even anti-heroes, actually do know some theory though they may not realize it or think of it that way. I think there are varying degrees of music theory, some know more than others. So what ? Knowing how to tune an instrument and the relationship between each note is theory. Playing F sharp on a bass while a guitarist plays a D chord or note is a semblance of theory. It does one no harm to know some theory and whether or not one becomes a theory snob is up to them entirely. I often wonder why on both sides of the fence such a big deal is made of it all.

 

[Greg_L]

Theory is for fags!

 

[RAMI]

Theory is for fags!

That's your theory.

 

[Greg_L]

It's not really a theory. More like a fact.

 

[grimtraveller]

Theory is for fags!

Theoretically.

Seriously though, in what I've noticed in discussions about theory, I'm of the opinion that many of us hear "theory" and think "rules" and the two could not be more different (Well, they could actually, but I like the absoluteness of the figure of speech. ). Lots of musicians that are happy with theory know that rules can be broken and do so. Of course, knowing theory is no guarantee that pleasurable music will be created, any more than not knowing it is. It's ironic that both having a grasp of music theory (whether that's minimal or ultimate) and not having a grasp of music theory can be a straitjacket.........or the open door to worlds hitherto unknown.


























"Hitherto unknown"......

 

[grimtraveller]

it had become fat, overblown, and a parody of itself.

I think that's a charge that could be levelled at every genre of music the world has ever known.

Solos and virtuosity killed the unabashed fun of rock and roll.

Not quite. The realization that there was money to be made and simple human irritation and the inevitability of change went a long way to killing the unabashed fun of some rock'n'roll for a variety of bods. Punks played solos. And some damn good ones too.

Thankfully, a relatively small movement of music fans had enough of that shit and blew the whole thing apart. Their contributions changed music forever and made it possible for anyone to rock the fuck out without having to study a bunch of stupid dots on lines.

That's kind of romantic. But going back almost half a century before punk, untutored, in some cases semi illiterate, murderers and farm hands did that (bluesmen and women). In fact, so much of American music that went on to be popular and influential and certainly British rock/pop did that. The outcry against much music of the 20th century by those that supposedly knew better stemmed precisely from the fact that many of the main players of the music didn't "study a bunch of stupid dots on lines". Punk moves were simply that particular generation's expression of what some members of previous generations had done with music of their time. The continuation of modernity{} and a, by then, well worn tradition.

Mainstream rock music sucked in the early 70's

That's because it was that good, it was strong enough to take your breath away !

 

[RAMI]

I think that's a charge that could be levelled at every genre of music the world has ever known.

Not quite. The realization that there was money to be made and simple human irritation and the inevitability of change went a long way to killing the unabashed fun of some rock'n'roll for a variety of bods. Punks played solos. And some damn good ones too.


That's kind of romantic. But going back almost half a century before punk, untutored, in some cases semi illiterate, murderers and farm hands did that (bluesmen and women). In fact, so much of American music that went on to be popular and influential and certainly British rock/pop did that. The outcry against much music of the 20th century by those that supposedly knew better stemmed precisely from the fact that many of the main players of the music didn't "study a bunch of stupid dots on lines". Punk moves were simply that particular generation's expression of what some members of previous generations had done with music of their time. The continuation of modernity{} and a, by then, well worn tradition.




That's because it was that good, it was strong enough to take your breath away !

I'd be impressed if it didn't take you a week to come up with it.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

If it weren't for those wanting to push the envelope of rock, we'd all still be listening to the umpteen billionth cover of "Good Golly Miss Molly", none of them being anywhere near as good as the original, and all of them getting progressively more boring.

And if it weren't for the rock opera of the mid 70's, punk and new wave would have never happened inthe late '70s, just as if it weren't for the synth rock of the 80's, grunge would have never left the coffee shops of Seattle.

This argument of music theorists or musicians versus wankers or headbangers is a false choice. It's all a cycle of fashion, like skirt lengths or hair styles. One could not exist or succeed without the other to takes it's place in the pop culture periodically.

There's no choice between the Ramones and Costello, or between the Clash and Taking Heads, or even between Nirvana and Bacharach. They all are great for what they are, because they all have something to offer and something worth listening to for anyone who actually likes *music* and not just a very narrow and marrow-minded subset of a half a genre of music.

The only folks that don't like the idea of learning and exploring the possibilities of music are those unwilling or unable to do so.

G.

 

[benherron.rrr]

reading the word theory has really made the word lose all meaning.

Im one of those guys who can just play my instruments. I dont know any scales what so ever, yet practice has made it so what ever chord is beeing played, what ever key the song is in it usually takes me about a minute to find the right place. Is theory important? No, Why is it not important? Because 'theory' is best described to be the logical written form of music. As I see it, there are the creative types how find things of artistic value rather simple to do, and the academic types, people who always need a constant, and a way for everything to be explained, theory, in my opinion theory is and was created by and for these people for these people. For example: Im the creative type, about 10 years ago I used to have clarinet lessons with a guy who was totally opposite minded, while playing the instrument, telling what notes where where, and which notes corrisponded best with others, My friend needed this constant, he needed to know an E was an E and is corrisponded with the 5th B and the 3rd G,G# depending on maj or minor.

Like I said theory is a way to explain things. I know hardly any, and people ask me when im sat at a piano how I know how to play on the level I can, and I simply reply "I don't know". I am capable of writing very emotive music, to the skill of any theorist, the difference is I only care about the product not how I got there.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Im one of those guys who can just play my instruments. I dont know any scales what so ever, yet practice has made it so what ever chord is beeing played, what ever key the song is in it usually takes me about a minute to find the right place. Is theory important? No, Why is it not important? Because 'theory' is best described to be the logical written form of music.

I submit that you actually know more theory than you think you do, you just don't realize it or think about it in those terms. It's like saying that you don't know mathematics but you can make change for a dollar without a problem. The fact is you that you *do* know mathematics, at least enough to make correct change, you just chose not to call it mathematics.

It's the idea that knowing how to make change is all one needs to know about math that bothers me. Sure, it might get me by in the most basic of situations, but IMHO just getting by is not a very satisfying way to go about life.

IMHO, YMMV, SNAFU, ETC.

G.

 

[benherron.rrr]

I submit that you actually know more theory than you think you do, you just don't realize it or think about it in those terms. It's like saying that you don't know mathematics but you can make change for a dollar without a problem. The fact is you that you *do* know mathematics, at least enough to make correct change, you just chose not to call it mathematics.

It's the idea that knowing how to make change is all one needs to know about math that bothers me. Sure, it might get me by in the most basic of situations, but IMHO just getting by is not a very satisfying way to go about life.

IMHO, YMMV, SNAFU, ETC.

G.

I'm not trying to imply that I do not know any theory. Generally my analogy of music theory generates the image of a book of rules. My general out look on life is that I need the ability to get a good result, I do not need to know how to get a good result, Very much like art If I look at a painting my mind tells me if it is pleasing or not, I do not respect that there are critics telling me if it is good or not due to the mechanics of art. Like music when you listen to a song, do you like it because it is cleaver musically or because it reacts with your mind on an emotional level? I like some punk music, like generation x, generally punk is written around simple chords, I also like some of mozart's works eaqually. Im not grading those artists on how well they now how to write music, but how well I enjoy the end result. To me that is all that matters. It is without a doubt I write some songs around the key of C, However I am unawear that I am doing it. If it gives me the joy of writing a song, Isn't That what matters most? Very much on topic, If Im working on a mix and I decide to add some reverb Im not looking at how much Im adding and what im doing to it numerically, Im listening to weather it sounds better or worse.

Thats not to say that I'm being iggnorant. I understand the importance of knowlage. I learn though trial and error, Just like every song I write and record the quality of mixing, composition and preformance gets better because Im learning from my mistakes rather than reading the text telling me how I should do it, This is the way I learn, If I need help I will ask for it or I will look for it

 

[Greg_L]

I'd be impressed if it didn't take you a week to come up with it.

No shit. I'm not reading any of that rambling drivel. The statute of limitations has long passed.

 

[philbagg]

No shit. I'm not reading any of that rambling drivel. The statute of limitations has long passed.

Basically, on the subject on theory.

Us = Right

You = Wrong

Upset? Read the "tl/dr" posts

Is theory important? No, Why is it not important? Because 'theory' is best described to be the logical written form of music. As I see it, there are the creative types how find things of artistic value rather simple to do, and the academic types, people who always need a constant, and a way for everything to be explained, theory, in my opinion theory is and was created by and for these people for these people.

This (no offense) is wrong, unless I'm misunderstanding. There's no black and white.

There's obsessive, compulsive music nerds who would probably enjoy music more by reading it than listening. Then, there's the so-called "creative types" who wouldn't know what a crotchet looked like (heh heh ), but then there's MOST musicians, who fit between a margin of knowing a little theory, and a lot of theory. And generally speaking, most of them use the theory they know as a tool, or a reinforcement to their musical message. I know a good bit of theory. But I am constantly using it to know how to break the rules, not abide by them. Sometimes it's a bit of both. Whatever works, and whatever gets the message across in the most fluent way possible.

 

[Greg_L]

Basically, on the subject on theory.

Us = Right

You = Wrong

Upset? Read the "tl/dr" posts
.

Lol @ "us". Can you play anything at all?

But pray tell, what am I "wrong" about? Theory is not necessary. Prove that it is....without writing a book.

 

[60's guy]

No shit. I'm not reading any of that rambling drivel. The statute of limitations has long passed.

And that is what make you........the GERG.

The GERG knows of nothing more than other than the GERG'S opinion. Nothing more...nothing less.

Weak JakeOwa

 

[Greg_L]

And that is what make you........the GERG.

The GERG knows of nothing more than other than the GERG'S opinion. Nothing more...nothing less.

Weak JakeOwa

Nothing else matters. Why should I read a long post that has no chance of changing my mind anyway? That's a foolish waste of time. Thanks for stopping by though, you drunk talentless retard.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Generally my analogy of music theory generates the image of a book of rules.

Iin the interest of proper disclosure, I do not claim to be a music theorist; hell, I don't even claim to be much of a musician; I am an audio engineer, I work the other side of the glass.

But I have many long-time friends and associates who are full-blow pro musicians and are pretty killer on music theory, and my experience through working with them has been just the opposite. Yes, it may be a book of rules in a way, but these folks use there knowledge far more as a book of opportunity. They don't find the theory they have learned as a limiting book of rules, but as an opening to fresh possibilities that one may otherwise take a lifetime to figure out or accidentally trip across on their own.

It's one thing to know (intuitively or not) that when one hears a chord progression in a certain key, that one knows how to play along to it and even improv around it, but it's another thing to know the almost infinite variations and inversions and alternate fingerings and so forth that can change the emotional tone of the riff in ways that even the best basic techniques cannot. It's not simply a matter of showing off virtuosity, like everybody here seems to think, it's also a matter of techniquing even simple three-chord basics in ways that can make even "Good Golly Miss Molly" sound fresh and exciting again.

And since this BBS is about recording, we'd be remiss not to mention how important it can be in the studio to understand and talk the *language* of music. There has to be understanding between musician, engineer and producer as to exactly what is wanted or needed. Theory provides the language through which this can be communicated with understanding in a way that doesn't eat up the clock at best, or miscommunicate the intent at worst.

Of course if one person is playing all three roles that doesn't matter. But let's say your average home recorder or garage band does become successful enough to get noticed or even get a contract. Then the game has changed and you'll be needing to work with others. Knowing the language - and what to do with it - while perhaps not necessary, sure does give an advantage.

G.

 

[philbagg]

Lol @ "us". Can you play anything at all?

You know the answer to that

But pray tell, what am I "wrong" about? Theory is not necessary. Prove that it is....without writing a book.

Imagine you're talking to a guy, whose language you don't speak and he doesn't speak yours. You're trying to tell him something. Will you give him that message easier, and clearer by a rough game of "charades", or by knowing a few words of his language that'll get the point across?

While it's not necessary, it's a huge help. Then again, there's very few things in this life that are necessary.

 

[Greg_L]

Imagine you're talking to a guy, whose language you don't speak

That would never happen.

 

[miroslav]

Are you multilingual...or just someone who speaks with forked tongue?