Why is music theory filled with so much useless bullshit that no talented musician in history even thinks about?

why is music theory filled with so much useless bullshit that no talented musician in history even thinks about?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=CD-E-LDc384
youtube.com/watch?v=fjwWjx7Cw8I
lmgtfy.com/?q=audiation
youtube.com/watch?v=49alQj7c5ps
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

it's what happens when you try to convert music into words

>he fell for the music theory meme

>develop descriptive system to understand and analyze the workings of music
>some sperg on the internet gets mad because "three adjacent whole tones" is too esoteric a concept for them to bear
woooooooooow

>see these three notes? they're called three notes!
mkay

cute

>see these three ones, they make a three!

>no musician has ever thought about something as complex as tritones before
do you play bass?

I've seen some of your posts lately, but I've been banned so I couldn't say this sooner...
but now I would just like to let you know FUCK YOU

Get filtered, fucking tripfag faggot.

"Three adjacent whole tones" means a completely different thing to just "three notes", idiot

>tritone
>useless bullshit

>tritones
>complex
guitar and drums

Because it's primarily an analysis and troubleshooting tool for musicians. It's like the service manual for your car. Do you read it in order to understand how to drive? No - you reference it when there's something wrong.

BECAUSE ANY ASSHOLE WHO THINKS THERE IS A THEORY ABOUT SOMETHING AS ABSTRACT AND INSANE AS MUSIC IS AN ASSY ASSHOLE

see

You have to be 18+ to post here

>i can't be assed to learn something so it's completely useless

lmao imagine being this mad over an innocuous post

why are you quoting me lmao

>that reading comprehension
OP was the one who thought tritones were a uselessly complex idea, so I quoted him as saying that. I asked if he played bass to insinuate that he is a mouth breathing retard.

Because you're a fucking retard, kys

lol dumbass we said the literal same thing

Imagine OP's mind when confronted with something like polytonality or irrational meters

I mean, it's descriptive, not prescriptive. For example, the chord progression of G-D-C features a tritone when going from D to C (F# to C). That's an example of a tritone. You don't need to think to do something as simple as a I-V-IV chord progression yet it will have a tritone.

tl;dr Music Theory isn't Music's Ruleset, it's essentially labeling the inner workings of music.

i agree with everything you said but still go to leddit

seriously
intervals are like week 2 of an intro music theory class

>anyone on reddit knowing music theory

typical mu poster

>why are you quoting me lmao
Because you're wrong.

nope

Irrational time signatures are a meme my friend

Good bait

let's enjoy this one riff that makes use of a tritone

youtube.com/watch?v=CD-E-LDc384

see
Conscious use of music theory is utterly useless to a talented musician unless there is something wrong going on.

nothing you are saying contradicts anything that I have said lmfao

>Hurr durr I don't need to know theory, I just *feel* the music, man!
Everyone uses theory, dipshit. Even if all you know is how to play a C-Em-G-D progression and realizes it sounds good then that's theory. The difference is that some people can express it in words and actually communicate with other musicians about what's going on without sounding like a blubbering retard

>being such a butthurt spaz that you see a tripcode and immediately fly into a fury to attempt a debunking of a completely sensible and non-controversial post
why do anons do this ?? is it autism ??

I agree with you and I already hate you. stop being a faggot and drop the trip.

Literally every theory is like this.

>some sperg on the internet gets mad because "three adjacent whole tones" is too esoteric a concept
"three adjacent whole tones" isn't an esoteric concept in the least. It's such an elementary musical concept that it hardly ever needs to be described in theoretical terms. Which makes the OP right (about stuff like that being useless bullshit to talented musicians) and you are wrong in disagreeing.

>I just *feel* the music
Talented musicians just "hear" the music, because that's how music works.

>"three adjacent whole tones" isn't an esoteric concept in the least.
yeah i know you fucking aspie rofl thats the point
imagine having a reading comprehension this lo

yea and if you know music theory you can actually easily realize what you imagine instead of having to fumble around for hours and not even getting close

see
Actually talented musicians don't use music theory to write music. They use it to edit/refine what they've already written, IF necessary.

>wanting music to sound good
plek

>why do anons do this ??
Being anonymous means no one has preconceptions about what a poster is gonna say. Using a trip just means people know what to expect in advance.. Your reputation for retarded assholery precedes you.

he is correct here with
>develop descriptive system to understand and analyze the workings of music

Uhh the tritone is actually a pretty fucking important part of music.

Yeah, see So what your saying is that the OP is actually right?

>there is no craftsmanship in music, only godsend geniuses

people hating on music theory are the worst

And he is wrong here So important that it doesn't even need to be discussed since it is such an elementary concept to hear.

>play bass
>learning music theory
:^(

t. only listens to popular music

so having a word for the interval consisting of six half steps is superflous to you?

Yeah who needs music theory? I mean everyone has the talent, giftedness and imagination of popular musicians who didn't use theory, right? All art is subjective bro don't make me learn things
*releases generic bandcamp shoegaze jam in E minor on for the 13468737776468854th time*

see
>you can actually easily realize what you imagine
If you can already imagine exactly what it sounds like then theory is useless to you. Music theory =/= music notation.

here's also this obscure, little-known 60s psych rock song. deserved to be a hit but I guess everyone heard that tritone in the intro and threw the record away in disgust

youtube.com/watch?v=fjwWjx7Cw8I

if you think there isnt a great gap between imagining and actually realizing music you obviously never wrote any music

I'm a neo-classical composer with multiple performed works who regularly performs repertoire by the likes of Schubert, Britten and Ives at venues like Carnegie Hall and Saddlers Wells. Take what I say un-seriously at your own peril.

Do you know what a mediant is without using Google?

composers use intuition to compose
performers use intuition to perform
listeners may use theory to explain composers' and performers' intuition
both composers and performers may also use theory when intuition fails or to nuance either composition or performance

can be any minor or major chord thats a major or minor third away from the current chord

see
I know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

>a great gap between imagining and actually realizing music
Means you are lacking in playing ability on your chosen reference instrument. You don't need more theory, you need better chops.

Well shit, turns out Beethoven wasn't talented because he was deaf

>neoclassical

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You're aware that things like scales, intervals and chord progressions constitutes as theory, right? Are you telling me that no talented musicians knows scales?

How would you write a fugue without using theory.

I think you're deliberately misusing language. Nobody "needs" theory but even using a V-I progression because you know that's what a perfect cadence is means you're "using" music theory

you know britten and ives both heavily made use of deterministic concepts in their composing? thats like the purest form of directly making use of THEORY instead of whatever-they-imagine-sounds-cool-in-their-head

It's the proper name for the third scale degree of a diatonic scale. Ie. it's the ACTUAL name for an interval consisting of six half steps. Which you apparently didn't know (until I told you just now.) And yet, that didn't stop you from knowing what that interval was.
Ergo my point - details like that are indeed (for the most part) superfluous.

ITT: People who aren't musicians and thinks just because some musicians can't describe what they're doing in music theory terms means they don't use theory

lmgtfy.com/?q=audiation
He was incredibly talented.

An interval consisting of six half steps would be a tritone, the other user was right. What the fuck are you talking about?

thats doubly wrong
first of all, its not six half steps, but three or four
second, nobody today uses this word to describe intervals, but always the relationship between chords like i described (see any paper on schubert, that nice non-theory using composer you perform so often)

Laugh all you want. I'm the one ITT actually getting paid to make music.

>You're aware that things like scales, intervals and chord progressions constitutes as theory, right?
They actually AREN'T. They are basic features of music. Theory is just a way of describing them using non-musical methods.

>Are you telling me that no talented musicians knows scales?
A truly talented musician already have the sounds of scales internalized in their auditory cortex. So no - they don't NEED to know how scales are described in non-musical (aka theoretical) terms. It's mostly superfluous.

ITT: autists debate semantics

How do you think the "basic features of music" came about? Do you think cavemen knew what scale degrees a mixolydian scale consisted of when they started smashing rocks together?

>A truly talented musician already have the sounds of scales internalized in their auditory cortex. So no - they don't NEED to know how scales are described in non-musical (aka theoretical) terms. It's mostly superfluous.
If you know the name of a chord or scale and how to play it then congrats, you know theory. Or do you think Dm7 or Ionian are "musical" terms?

>What the fuck are you talking about?
>uses this word
Naming things in music is superfluous. Sounds are what matters. You don't need theory to make sounds - only to help refine what sounds you've ALREADY made if you feel such is necessary. People who get hung up on the supposed importance of music theory in WRITING (not analyzing - it IS useful there) music are destined to fail as composers.

t. Successful Composer

See

>How do you think the "basic features of music" came about?
Regular vibrations in a gaseous medium.

>Do you think cavemen knew what scale degrees a mixolydian scale consisted of when they started smashing rocks together?
Of course NOT. That's my point. They listened to the interplay of sounds and reacted. Formal music theory has naught to do with it.

so beethoven failed cause he made contrapuntal sketches for pretty much every major work of his?

>not analyzing - it IS useful there
You just disproved your own point. As a neoclassical composer you must have analysed the works of classical and other neoclassical composers and used your learning to some extent in order to compose your own music. If you truly didn't use theory at all to compose you wouldn't be able to call the music you compose "neoclassical".

How would you write a fugue without using theory.
The same way the first person who wrote a fugue did - by fiddling around with the sounds at my disposal until I like what I hear. Making music itself is essential. Music theory is secondary.

He SUCCEEDED because he had a really well-trained ear from his youth. Everything else he accomplished musically was completely dependent upon that fact.

no he succeeded in doing nice counterpoint cause he studied counterpoint for multiple years in his youth you moron

ITT: Mu-drone numales discuss about something they don't know batshit about and call it pretentious and over-complex because their nut sized brain can't process it

Keep listening to music because it's "fun" or "chill" you ultra plebs, but please stop pretending you are better than top 40 listener.

you are all stupid, spouting stupid opinions because you dont have any real life experience on the subject you claim to know about

You should learn theory. But dont listen to me, listen to a professional with actual skin in the game

youtube.com/watch?v=49alQj7c5ps

Most of those things had a reason to be and a deeper meaning (usually spiritual), but thanks to the now prevalent materialism, they've lost all meaning, seeming pointless.

>As a neoclassical composer you must have analysed the works of classical and other neoclassical composers
Yes, because that's what they make you do in formal music school.

>and used your learning to some extent in order to compose your own music.
No, because I am not a hack composer. Detailed analyses of other people's music are only helpful for accomplishing two things:
1. Writing music that sounds exactly like someone else's (something I don't do since I'm not a hack), and
2. Understanding how to analyze your own music AFTER you've initially composed it.
Initial composition is all on you and your creativity. Analysis (music theory) is an optional 2nd step.

>If you truly didn't use theory at all to compose you wouldn't be able to call the music you compose "neoclassical".
It's neo-classical because it uses much of the same SOUNDS as previous eras of music. Theory has almost nothing to do with it.

this is a useless post and should be deleted

No key signatures beyond (in circle of fifths) E or Aflat
No rhythmic subdivisions less than sixteenth notes

If you need something beyond this, either specify it as it comes up or rethink your approach.
Your Welcome.

Guys, this dude is the best composer on Sup Forums. Listen to him. It's obvious he knows what he's talking about.

That's not the point of music theory. Why wouldn't you want to understand, study, dissect and classify something as fascinating as music? It's what humans do with everything in nature. It can get annoyingly confusing for outsiders because it is incredibly complex at various levels. In math you have theories about the very concept of sum. You may argue that you don't need them to know what two plus two is, but, again, that's not the point.

It's so much easier to learn how to play practically rather than read about it. Who could seriously read a textbook and say "Ah, let me apply this to playing an instrument right away!" Fucking autistic people who can never actually be famous, and just stuck being some boring, well-educated cellist or someshit.

The point is any literal retard will realize something's off when you play a scale with an accidental, meaning that scales are just a way to describe how music inherently works
Remember when you were learning scales and you weren't sure on a note? You probably knew you got it wrong as soon as you played it even though you didn't actually know the scale

One of the main reasons for why music theory exists is so musicians can actually communicate with each other no matter what instrument they play so it's no wonder that the aspies on Sup Forums hates it and looks down on people who learn it

A wise man once said you're always only half a step away from a good note

>Becoming famous is the end goal for all artists

Found the middle schooler.

>this is the absolute state of Sup Forums

>one post represents the entire board

>muh top-secret """real""" music club

kek wrf nigga