Theory and creativity

[stubby]

A few days ago,I posted a thread in "The Byrds" forum. It asked about David Crosby's understanding/training in music theory. I was wondering to what degree Crosby's brilliant harmonies came from great ear/voice intuition vis-a-vis theoretical understanding of harmony.

This got me considering something I've been thinking about for some time. Obviously, a good knowledge of music theory can help a player in many ways. But, can too much knowledge of theory get in the way of a musician's creativity? Can relying on the more "mathematical" (for lack of a better word) side of music interfere with the creative process? After all, each process uses a different side of the brain. I guess what I'm asking is, can theory sometimes get in the way? Thoughts?

[jdogric12]

Yes, absolutely. What often makes music interesting is that it sets up an expectation, then exceeds it or goes in an even different way. Too much theory may be impressive, but gets you stuck in the rut of the expected.

Example: A common convention (not rule, notice) is to write chords in order of the circle of fifths, e.g. Em Am Dm G7 C. But if that G7 went to Bb instead of C, your ears would perk up a lot more.

[tennis_nick]

I'm going to have to disagree a bit, and agree a bit, as it is completely dependent on the musician. It's in my never too humble opinion that the best way to break rules is to know them all beforehand.
I'll say that I am a light-theorist. I know scales and modes and how they all fit together, but it ends there. I think it's good to have a decent knowledge of theory as well as a strong musical ear, because a lot of one and none of the other causes problems.

Lets take a look at the 100% theory, 0% musicality.
They end up playing crazy "melodies" over countless chord changes in what is technically and musically impressive.... but my god is it ever boring!

On the other scale, the 100% musical, you have guys like John and Paul. They play what they hear and the result is fantastic.

The problem is, I can't think of two other people who have that much of a fine tuned musical ear. People like me might hear cool stuff in their heads, but they need a basic grasp of musical theory to get it down, or even to embellish it.

My final verdict - Learn yourself some musical theory, but don't let it absorb you.

[sloop_john_b]

This exact discussion hit me real hard the other day.

I have a friend who had been working on his album for the first half of this year. He knows next to zilch musically and isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed, so expectations were low. It was this big secret project that few were allowed to hear. I got to hear some of the raw tracks, since I played bowed double bass and electric bass on a few of the cuts. I didn't think much of it at the time. Sort of Brian Eno-lite.

Then, the other day, I heard the final, finished mix. I was absolutely astounded. The songs were pretty good, but it was the arrangements moreso that were so unbelievable. He's a big Phil Spector/Pet Sounds fan, so there were not only gobs of reverb, but backup girl singers, horns, woodwinds, strings, etc.

It turns out he arranged the parts for the players the same way he did when I was playing bass on his sessions - by telling them to do whatever they wanted. He would have some vague, abstract idea at times about what he wanted from the clarinet player, for example, but he put full faith in the session musicians, and by getting good players, there was no doubt that it would come out great.

It's obvious in his piano playing, too. He's a guitar player who basically just started plunking around on the piano, and consequently came up with these bizarre chords/chord progressions that someone like me would never think to come up with, because I already know what's "right" and what's "wrong".

But yet, despite all this, he's constantly telling me that he wishes he knew what I knew. I'm always telling him to stop now, don't learn anymore!

If there is an upside to knowing music theory in and out, I haven't discovered it yet. But since my next project is going to be highly orchestrated music, that's going to be the real test.

[jdogric12]

Highly orchestrated? Like Illinoise? Neat.

Sounds like we're all on the same page on this, one way or the other.

[jimk]

[My friend is]... a guitar player who basically just started plunking around on the piano, and consequently came up with these bizarre chords/chord progressions that someone like me would never think to come up with, because I already know what's "right" and what's "wrong".

But yet, despite all this, he's constantly telling me that he wishes he knew what I knew. I'm always telling him to stop now, don't learn anymore!

I don't know, John. I doubt that a little book larnin' is going to destroy his basic musicality.

JimK

[lyle_from_minneapolis]

I can't think of one way that knowledge of music theory would hinder your creativity.

Well...unless you decide to regard music theory as a dictatorial rulebook. That might mess you up, but it wouldn't be the fault of music theory. In my view, music theory is a musical communication system, a map, a language. But it isn't a Bible. It shows you how tones are related, how chordal structures interact, how to notate your ideas for others.

Back in the old Gregorian chanting days, certain intervals and changes were considered "Evil". And there are opinions today that mask themselves as "facts of music theory" regarding certain "rules" of harmony...one I recall is that you shouldn't allow parallel harmonies to continue more than a few notes or so, that they should instead be counterpointed in different ways. As if that is Fact. And if Crosby Stills and Nash took that to heart, most of their harmonies would be quite different...but to me they sound excellent.

So if you learn music theory without abandoning your own critical judgment, you'll probably become a better musician. But if you decide that all those professors are ever so much smarter than you are...well, yeah, you'll cease to explore musical landscapes, you won't dare to push the envelope or break "rules". You'll just become another college professor.

[stubby]

Hmmm, some interesting comments here. Personally, my knowledge of theory is not terribly strong and I've always wondered how it would help my playing. Usually, when I pick up a bit of theory knowledge, I relate it to situations I've used in my playing - you know a realization, "Ah, so that's what I was doing!" I'm primarily a rhythm type player and do lots of fingerpicking and playing around chords. Leads that I play tend to be centred around different chord formations but I employ a few scale patterns with regularity too. I've always wondered, for instance, if guys with advanced theory training think "theoretically" in advance of a lead - e.g. I'm looking for a certain mood on this solo so I think I'll play in a certain scale in dorian mode or whatever. You get the idea. For those of you who really know your theory inside out, is this the kind of thought process that inhabits your brain or do you go more by feel, intuition, and impulse, perhaps unconsciously using the theory knowledge you have?

[deaconblues]

In the words of a friend, "learn all the theory you can...then forget it!"

[tennis_nick]

That last bit may have made a lot more sense than you think!

It's like anything, riding a bike, snowboarding, playing tennis...

You learn the basics of what you're doing, you get them down perfectly, or as well as you'd like, but when you go do those activities, you just do it! You don't go back and think about all the tiny things, you just get in and do it. the theoretical aspect happens naturally, and subconsciously.

[Clint]

What tennis_nick says makes alot of sense. I have never met anyone that was talented at something that they did not enjoy; and was willing to dedicate alot of time and energy.

[lyle_from_minneapolis]

I actually did forget most of the theory I learned.

[tennis_nick]

I actually did forget most of the theory I learned.

Me too, but I'm sure my playing is dependant on that old knowledge.

[lyle_from_minneapolis]

Out of the head and into the gut.

[jdogric12]

When I'm writing, the theory saturates the subconscious, so I don't even realize I'm in a rut, so I have to try to break myself of it, usually by backing up a few measures and replacing a chord with a more dissonant or strange one. A lot of times THAT sounds contrived and I generally keep and use only about 10-20% of what I write as a result. This is worst when I start with lyrics alone, and then try to add chords and melody later. I get better results simply sitting down, plunking out odd chords and seeing if they fit together somehow and improvising a melody and lyrics along to it. It's very easy to revise/rewrite lyrics; the music is much more difficult and usually begs to be spontaneous, as an accompaniment to a steady stream of thoughts and concepts in arcs.