Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels
so what are these?
|
Well, the problem is that learning fundamentals depends on which musical practice you're talking about. In most music schools, there is heavy emphasis on common-practice tonality (ca. 1600-1909), which is still an option today or at least has been absorbed by other musical styles. I guess rock music is a mix of common-practice tonality and modal practice, certain rhythms, etc. But when it comes to common-practice tonality the usual trio of fundamentals is counterpoint, harmony, and form--all three from both a written and an aural perspective.
But it's hard to say that if you're not interested in classical music that you shouldn't bother with those things. Like I said, aspects of those things are found in pop/rock/jazz. Form, harmony and so on. And secondly, you
should be interested in classical music. I'm constantly bothered by, for example, how the average educated person loves Shakespeare and Austen, but has no interest in their contemporaries Palestrina and Haydn. What's the deal?
I know what you mean about music students. I know plenty that hate theory and get bogged down, complaining about how they can't listen to music anymore. I am not one of those people - I came to music first by playing, not listening. However, every theoretical thing I've learned has only enriched my muscial experiences. Every day I have epiphanic experiences with music - I view it as a very spiritual and mysterious thing. I just can't understand those people who say they can't enjoy music anymore or that theory ruins music. To be honest, I kind of hate those people.
But anyway, as far as why you might want to learn theory as a rock listener, for example.....there are often musical ideas and things being said that depend on the listener understanding certain things, either theoretical or even historical. The best example that pops in my head is in several Beatles songs. If you want a good example of what I'm getting at, then seek out a pair of books by Walter Everett called The Beatles as Musicians. He's a theory professor at the University of Michigan and the way he analyzes the songs is really awesome. He also breaks down the overall musical language of the Beatles, which I found enlightening.
Of course, just because I like something doesn't mean everyone should. I probably come off as some kind of zealous proselytizer. But undergraduates in musical schools are very skeptical and there will probably be a revolution soon in the way theory is taught; defensiveness goes with the territory. Where I'm going for my doctoral studies, they have a pretty forward-looking program. They teach mainly form, structure, rhythm, and a more inclusive harmony. I think it is working because as an approach, it is more applicable to different musical styles.