Do Aspiring Composers NEED To Learn Music Theory? | Part 2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- I'm still not sure if I've answered this question properly! Anyway, thanks for watching and entertaining my musings!
If you haven't checked out Part 1 - Questions, watch it here: • Is Music Theory Necess...
Adam Neely's film: • Music Theory and White...
If you'd like to tip me, thank you so much! You can donate to my PayPalMe link here: www.paypal.me/d.... All proceeds go back into the creation of my musical content. I really appreciate your support in advance!
If you'd like to become a regular contributor, join my Patreon page for as little as $5 per month, with exclusive rewards in return! Join at / dankeenmusic
I am a composer, producer and musician, based in London.
Email me at: dankeenmusic@mail.com
Follow me at:
www.dankeenmusi...
/ dankeenmusic
/ dan.keen
/ _dankeen - เพลง
I was one of those ghastly individuals who believed that learning music theory would limit my creativity and ruin the joy of discovery. I got away with it for so long because I had a broad enough musical upbringing that I could do a good job of 'aping' certain styles. Either way it's a decision I really regret.
I now view music theory as a language. This is partly informed by my experience as an ex-pat living in a foreign land. I can speak enough of the lingo to get by. I can deal with the day-to-day of life, and even have conversations with people. However, my lack of vocabulary and grammar leaves me unable to have deeper, more profound conversations. The lack absolutely limits my ability to express myself.
With language, understanding form and function and increasing vocabulary afford us so many more options with which we can express and emote. No different with music. It's expansive rather than limiting.
So many conversations I've wanted to have ended up never getting started, and so much music that i never ended up writing, because I didn't have the building blocks to make them a reality. Divine inspiration can only go so far. After that, it's all vertical composition and frustration ;)
Thanks for the video :D
These talks are incredible!
I love that quote by Adam Neely! It reminds me of GCSE and A-Level music; studying Bach chorales and suchlike, being told that you must never have parallel 5th or octaves, double the third etc etc, and I never understood (or could get an answer) as to why!
Ultimately music is a language, and you can't take away someones musicality. You can still talk and converse without reading and writing.
Great that you also mentioned Adam Neely's video! It's been quite a spur within pretty much all the music discussion groups. People can often forget that Music Theory is a theory, some acceptable principles offered to explain certain phenomena, the same definition applied from scientific theories. A bunch of people analyzed a great amount of music and offered some explanations of why they sound good. After those resources exist, it became easier and faster for people to study music, but before that, the tips that you gave is basically how people actually had to study music. Music theory isn't prescriptive, but descriptive. You definitely can't study music just by reading theory books.
As other commenters here also mentioned, music is a language. Having learned a couple of spoken languages myself, learning music is also like learning languages. And within the realm of music, there are also a couple of different languages. There are "the harmonic style of 18th century European musicians", Jazz/"American music", Classical Arabic/Eastern Mediterranean, etc. But as how English has become the de facto lingua franca of the world, it's also inevitable that "the harmonic style of 18th century European musicians" has also become the lingua franca of music. But lexicographers would also tell you that dictionaries aren't meant to be prescriptive, but descriptive. As the English language is evolving today, and so are other languages, "the harmonic style of 18th century European musicians" today doesn't have to sound like the 18th century either.
Nice one Dan. Love the way you get on with the message and no filler or fluff. Great stuff mate. Thanks
Thanks for your kind comments, Nigel! Much appreciated!
Always an interesting discussion. In theory the more tools you have the more you can build. It's fun learning how to use more tools and get better at making stuff. (I think that's why we watch TH-cam stuff). It's the stuff you make that is important. I think most people who make stuff always want to get better.
It's also impossible to be able to be a pro at absolutely everything. That's what makes music a life long journey of fun/pain/joy/frustration.
Thanks for answering the question - great answers. Look forward to the dissonance video - one of my favourite topics!
Sorry in advance for the very long comment underneath.
Two very interesting videos on music theory, thanks for sharing your thoughts on it. I initially planned to write a thesis in acoustics on the difference of self-taught vs school-taught pianists one and half decade ago. By analyzing finger movements, expression, velocity etc. in how they would do well known songs and creative improvisation I had hope to derive some interesting findings. Sadly, finding pianists with ample time to set aside to help students (without any budget) proved impossible. It would be interesting to know your thoughts on this as a professional pianist, and if you think that in some way classical music theory can inhibit some creative freedom when composing a theme, because you can feel some sort of “constraint” to not break established/traditional “rules”?
Lastly; As a chess player, I find this very similar to classical chess, how opening theory can bind you to certain preferred choices, but also give safe ground for creative outbursts of lines to play in the mid game. To me the key denominator here is intuition. By extensive knowledge, through education, practice and experience, you hone your intuitive prowess, it being Magnus Carlsen or Hans Zimmer. Never stop learning.
Best of luck in the future, you’ve got a new subscriber. Look forward to more videos in 2021!
It helps. Definitely not necessary. Great discussion!
Thank you for this inspiring video
Nice one. I think inspiration and being moved can ‘live’ without theory ... it still can become moving art or music ... but theory as a stand-alone application without digging deeper and being inspired or moved by something becomes hollow and shallow. So I guess it’s the right balance and knowing and learning / understand where theory can lead and help you. And sometimes new things happen while not having the tools at hand but being inspired and wanting to create something similar ... you need to use your ears and imagination. That can be a daunting trajectory. But interesting. And again everyone has to find his own balance and what’s needed on his path. Sometime I envy you with all the tools at hand sometimes I don’t. Sometimes I think I need to learn and understand more sometimes I don’t. For me it comes down on staying curious ... still a humble learner.
Thanks for your comment, Riad! Believe me, I'll always be learning. It's not about the destination; it's the journey!
I tell everyone who asks me this if you learn the piano you'll be way more efficient at writing for orchestra. I have to sit there working out chords on the piano (don't get me started on inversions) which takes a lot of time out of deadlines. It's my biggest regret! Great vid as always Dan
As someone who took music theory for a year as part of a music course, I find little use for it in practice. To me music theory is analogous to formalised grammar; parts of speech, clauses, syntax, phonology and so on. You can learn a whole bunch of formal grammar, but it's really quite far removed from the act of storytelling. And correspondingly, for every person well-versed in music theory who composes great music, there are 100 other people just as well versed in it that can't compose at all.
I'm also a bit skeptical of the idea that the kind of very broad skill set you might get from music theory is applicable to the industry. Because while it's true you will be more familiar with many genre's tropes and phrases, you will also be drawing from an arsenal of very homogeneous techniques, when what you really need to stand out in the industry is to create your own unique aesthetic. There's no need to fall back on the canonical grammar of mystery novels when you've read 200 of them, and you were unlikely to be exceptional at them if you'd never read any before. Likewise, if you listen to and study 200 jazz tracks that you love, you'll absorb all sorts of idiosyncratic techniques that coalesce together to form a unique approach.
Anyway, just thought I'd share my take! Perhaps if I composed classical I'd use music theory more, but for most other genres I find the limiting factor is how much I've listened to and composed for it in the first place.
To learn an instrument is also not necessary. And to learn Logic Pro and Sibelus is not necessary. If you sing out of pitch, this is still no a problem. But where do you want to go, this will be your question as musician; if you do the necessary or beyond the necessary. Great art did not overestimate what is not necessary, but went always beyond the necessary.
Hey Dan! Great video! Was wondering what you did for your undergraduate degree on, was it music related? Currently looking at options now!
Thanks! It was Music