Home » Blogs » John Mark Piper's blog

Theory and Analysis: Putting the Cart Before the Horse??

by John Mark Piper | Thu, 09/25/2008 - 13:34

The conversation that recently took place regarding improvising on the blues has given me food for thought for a blog. I think intellectualizing music through analysis is a good thing if fully understood. The process of analyzing music helps to teach and learn new things about music and often helps to find weaknesses and holes in our knowledge.

Analysis can help us move forward by organizing musical sound. However, I think we often become so good at analyzing that we can tend to put the "cart before the horse". If we adhere strictly to rules relating to chord tones and scales, we can unknowingly limit ourselves to those notes only and shut out many other options. The problem often is that this type of use of analysis is a door closer instead of a door opener. The reason is because many of the sounds that we may hear in our head are there due to the great music we've listened to that is not yet represented in our relatively limited analytical knowledge OR, the opposite; our analytical theories and analysis go beyond our ears ability to keep up. It's kind of like two old sayings, "he knows just enough to be dangerous" and "don't put the cart before the horse".

Improvising focused on the knowledge of chord tones, scale choices and music theory can then become a frustration because you can't find the tones you're looking for within the rules. Therefore, your choices of notes are limited to the scale tones of a given chord scale that falls within the rules. What we may not know yet is that the tones we're hunting for are ones that we might otherwise be on the verge of hearing. What we also don't realize is that the tones that we're hunting for might be tones derived from contradictions of the chord or implied chords between the chords.

What I mean is that if our ears hear something we like, the best course of action is to latch onto it, figure it out and learn how to play it. THEN, analyze it to come up with a "THEORY" to help explain why it works.

Blues is the perfect example of this. If you place the cart (theory and analysis) before the horse (music), you'll play something stupid.

We can sometimes force ourselves to move ahead with the "gentle" coaxing of theory and analysis but too often we tend to learn a lot of bunk sooner than we can use it or hear it. Then, we master rules from it and create phony boundaries that do nothing but stifle musical growth and limit creative options.

Think of it this way: Teaching modes, chord scales and theory as a primary means to teaching improvisation is as limiting as teaching a 12 year old, 5 foot tall basket ball player that "slam dunking" is the only way to shoot a basket. He has put the cart before the horse and looks very stupid.

Just another opinion and hopefully food for thought….

Comments

by norbert | Wed, 04/06/2011 - 19:04

As the host of this site

As the host of this site pointed out at the recent workshop in Sassenheim: it's important to find the fine line between conforming and rebelling (did I voice that right Tony?/what were your exact words?). I found that a great thought and comes to my mind many times and in this context as well.

When absorbing a language just aurally with the sound and feel for it's dance, one might need to learn some grammar sometime as well, while learning a language from grammar might impede somewhat the flow of conversation, because of overheated thought.
Though I can't help, but tend to accumulate some bunk sooner than I can use it and after sometimes years just that bolt or piece of wood fits exactly a need I couldn't have predicted with grammar at the moment I found that bunk so attractive in the first place.

by Babu | Wed, 04/06/2011 - 14:26

Carts and horses

For me there are mainly two situations : If the musician has a tremendous ear, theory is quite useless. Think about Django Reinhart, knowing absolutely nothing about musical rules but able to hear and play instantly every melody and hamony, and create on the spot a counter-melody and new harmonies. For him, rules were totally transparent.
For others, rules are good for study, training etc... but when it's time to play in real situation - in front an audience, with others musicians - what counts is the music we really have inside us. And generally there is a gap (big or little) between the music we really can play and totally assume, and what we have learned. Creativity comes from the very deep inside of ourselves. Just the totally understood rules can help to create something new (as it was our rules). That brings me to the point that a really great creator has his own rules, he makes the rules change. The goal is "digest" theory before being able to use it in a creative way, in my opinion. Others thoughs ?

by Randy_Sutin | Thu, 04/07/2011 - 06:58

the other thought from me...

I think theory is quite useful for all. It provides even the musician with the greatest ears a lexicon or system of rhetoric with which they can have an articulate discussion about something musical which has happened or might happen.

In my opinion, it does not provide a set of rules for creation of future music. At best it describes something that either worked or didn't in the past. It does this in limited terms, frequently only characterizing the melodic and/or harmonic content of the music without regard for a wide variety of other elements.

To my way of thinking, the study of theory exposes a wealth of resources to you which you are free to use as you choose based on the style of music you are performing and its standard practices.

by John Keene | Thu, 04/07/2011 - 08:20

Along those lines...

Along those lines, there is sometimes a presumption that people who have tremendous ears but don't know any theory purposely chose that situation. Personally, I've never met a musician who told me that they went out of their way NOT to learn theory, but more the case that the opportunity never presented itself or they were too distracted with other things in life. And many of them have fallen by the wayside as they got older and youth was no longer in their favor as a marketing tool. It's sad for me to see a lot of my old friends who still want to play not able to do so since they don't possess the knowledge required in a 21st century world.